|
Introduction
The Orientalists' Treatment of the Prophet's Life :
I. A Brief Outline of their Methodology in Studying Islam:
First of all, it is necessary to acknowledge clearly and
frankly the efforts made by the Orientalists in the service
of the Islamic intellectual heritage. For they have devoted
their energy to studying the different fields of Islamic
knowledge whose treasures have captivated them, and to
analysing and authenticating documents, a task that required
tremendous efforts. It would be ungrateful and presumptuous
to deny their contribution in this connection. It is thanks
to their work that many treasures of the Islamic
intellectual heritage have been brought to light and
published after they had been confined to library shelves
for many centuries. Actually, many a scientific work and
historical document were published for the first time
through these efforts.
Notwithstanding our acknowledgement of the service rendered
by the Orientalists, it should be stressed here that the
objective of the large majority of these scholars has been
the search for the weak spots in Islamic civilisation and
history and their use for political and religious purposes.
The huge amount of intellectual work accomplished by the
Orientalists in the various fields of Islamic studies is a
bottomless sea, so to speak. Yet the most common standard
reference among the researchers of all levels is The
Encyclopedia of Islam which was prepared and published under
the patronage of the International Union of Academies. Most
of its contents deal with Islam and the Muslims, and include
opinions and information that need revision and
rectification.
If we take into account the fact that this encyclopedia
plays a major role in giving a false image of Islam and
abounds in absurdities, we will have an idea of how
Orientalists study Islam and conceive of Islamic
civilisation. Thus, we will be all the more aware of the
urgent need not only for the revision of the information it
provides and the correction of the distortions therein, but
also for the examination of the ideas and opinions it
contains which are pernicious to both Islam and the Muslims.
The ideas and judgements of some modern Orientalists have
improved and become free of some aspects of bias and
hostility which are due to differences related to religion
or interests, or caused by a shortage in the number of
references available to Orientalists, as well as the
latter’s ignorance of the Arabic language and the bad
quality of old translations. Yet some of their writings
about the Islamic religious and intellectual heritage still
contain all sorts of machinations and distortions, resulting
from their evil intent at times, and from their
misunderstanding of historical facts or the specificities of
the Islamic vision at others.
These Orientalists were, and still are, ignorant of numerous
facts pertaining to the Islamic culture; they will remain so
as long as they live in an intellectual and cultural
environment that is alien to the Islamic civilisation, and
so long as they look at it from a perspective tinted by
their culture and milieu.
Furthermore, their coming from a materialistic intellectual
background will make it difficult for them to understand the
spiritualism inherent in the Islamic civilisation and
history. For a materialistic and historical interpretation
alone is not suitable for the explanation of the Muslim's
work and behaviour, or for the study of Muslim history. The
goal of a Muslim in all the acts he performs throughout his
life is primarily the desire to please Allah; therefore, his
conception of things and the standards by which he evaluates
them differ in essence from the conception and standards of
a materialistic person:
- “Is then the man who believes no better than the man who
is Rebellious and wicked? Not equal are they.”(1)
- “Shall We treat those who believe and work deeds of
righteousness, the same As those who do mischief On earth?”(2)
A Critique of the Methodology of Modern Orientalists:
The early Orientalists openly expressed their hostility to
Islam, attributing all kinds of shortcomings and evils to it
and assaulting it with lies and calumnies.
Modern Orientalists have changed their methods; they have
abandoned direct slandering and open hostility, and
pretended to be fair and objective, so as to meet the
requirements of scientific research. Their aim in doing so
is to appeal to the Muslim reader in an attempt to win his
confidence. Thus, they admit the flaws of their
predecessors, and they shed light on the good qualities
intrinsic to Islam, while implicitly resorting to intrigue
and calumny.
The judicious Muslim reader discovers these secret
machinations which lie behind a façade of pretentious
fairness and objectivity. Some modern Muslim scholars have
demonstrated that the writings of modern Orientalists are
far more dangerous than those of their predecessors, who
openly displayed their hostility and filled their books with
lies, calumnies and false allegations. For the former
category managed by their tricky method to influence the
less-judicious reader, who easily succumbs to the charm of
their ideas. This is why we deem it rewarding to mention
some of the criticism levelled against the modern
Orientalists' way of writing about Islam :
1. Objectivity as a Smoke-screen:
Many of these Orientalists claim to be objective in their
studies and appear to be intent on providing true facts;
they present a few positive aspects of Muslim religion and
civilisation, which leaves the reader with the impression
that these scholars are objective and committed to abiding
by the rules of genuine scientific research. But when their
studies are submitted to a critical mind and subjected to
close scrutiny, they turn out to be fancies and fallacies.
These Orientalists, who hide under the cover of objectivity
and fairness, are not in reality different from their
predecessors, except in one aspect, namely that they do not
reveal their fanaticism and hostility towards Islam in an
explicit way, for they try to present their ideas in a way
that would be appealing to Muslims.
Nevertheless, a fair researcher cannot deny the existence
among modern Orientalists of a number of scholars whose
scientific mind has prevented them from blindly adhering to
Christian prejudice or to colonial ambitions. On the
contrary, they tried to be truly objective, and spoke out
the results of their studies, without falling prey to
external influences. Some of them have converted to Islam
and become its ardent defenders.
2. Setting Dubious Scientific Objectives:
It is common practice among Orientalists to set a dubious
scientific objective for themselves and to decide to achieve
it by any means. Thus, they start hunting for evidence,
without being in the least concerned about the credibility
of the evidence or the reliability of its sources. That is
why they collect information from all kinds of texts, be
they prosaic or poetic, or they indulge in humour and
buffoonery. Then, they present it in a bold manner after
disguising it. Moreover, it is on this information that they
base their judgements about Islam, judgements that exist
only in their minds. The majority of these Orientalists
conceal in their writings a certain amount of poison, as it
were, while they strive not to offend the Muslim reader,
render him suspicious or make him lose his confidence in the
author.
3. Orientalism's Enjoyment of the Protection of the Church
from the Start and that of Colonial Institutions in Modern
Times:
This protection has forced the field to be at the service of
these circles and has prevented it from rising to the level
of genuine scientific research that aims at fair judgement.
4. The Monks' and Priests' contribution to the Rise of
Orientalism:
A fact which played a major role in steering this field of
study towards fanaticism and hostility towards Islamic
civilisation. This is why modern Orientalists have been
unable to cast aside the false and ridiculous ideas that had
been perpetuated by their ancestors.
5. The Aversion of Orientalists to Scientific Methodology:
A characteristic which appears in their neglect of the
fundamental principles of this methodology and in their
taking as a starting point false allegations in the study of
Islam, such as their consideration of the Holy Quran as a
man-made text and the Prophet (PBUH) as an imposter, along
with their heavy reliance on unreliable sources and their
indifference to the authentic ones, as well as their drawing
of evidence from false and vile accounts, while neglecting
the firmly true ones.
6. The Orientalits' Recourse to Disguise and Deception in
their Studies:
A fact which is manifested in their mingling truth with
falsehood, their cultivation of doubts under the cover of
being committed to the socio-historical method, their misuse
of evidence and their analysis of Islamic history in a
misleading way, so as to serve the intended objectives and
goals of Orientalism.
II. The Way the Orientalists Write the Biography of the
Prophet:
Orientalists, of diverse nationalities and backgrounds, have
tried their hands at writing the biography of the Messenger
of Allah (PBUH). But very few were fair in their endeavour,
while the majority were completely biased. This is not a
surprise, for most of them were missionaries who were still
filled with hatred for Islam and its adherents. This is the
reason why they tried hard to scrutinise historical and
biographical texts in the hope of finding gaps or breaches
that might help them support their allegations by means of
'evidence'. Thus, whenever they came across a gap that would
allow them to vent their hatred, they used it; or a spurious
account that denied, or differed from the authentic facts,
they brought it to light and celebrated it. They did not
have the least concern for accuracy in this respect, even
when they distorted the truth, as long as such a practice
helped them and suited their fancies.
Strange though as it may seem, in order to quench their
desires and inherited feelings of hatred, they bestowed an
aura of authenticity and truth on the fabricated accounts
and the apocryphal Judaic texts, as long as these sources
supported their falsehood. When it came to the true
accounts, however, they regarded them as inferior and
fictitious, because such accounts did not coincide with the
objectives which made the Orientalists interested in writing
the biography of the Prophet (PBUH) in the first place.
The majority of these Orientalists launch their vehement
attacks on the Messenger's way of life, falsely accusing him
of all types of hideous attributes, which are not worth
recalling here. The very few Orientalists who are known for
their fairness refute this ignominious slander and treat the
Prophet (PBUH) quite fairly. The number of the biographies
of the Prophet (PBUH) written by both European Orientalists
and others is large, indeed. These biographies include thin
and substantial texts, as well as true and false elements.
Among these authors are the fair and the just. Nevertheless,
it must be stated that in the modern period, European
Orientalists have been relatively fair in their treatment of
the Prophet (PBUH) when compared to their predecessors. Had
the Muslims awakened from their lethargy, carried out an
organised Call to Islam Campaign and spent generously on it,
they would have been able to correct a lot of falsehoods and
discard a lot of misleading information and doubts cast upon
their religion, history and civilization, the life of the
Messenger of Allah (PBUH) and his trustworthiness. Better
still, large numbers of people in Europe and elsewhere would
have converted to Islam.
Writing the Prophet's Biography with a European Mentality:
Most of the Orientalists grew up in a European cultural
environment with its specific ways of thinking and
conception of things; they learnt to adhere to a
materialistic and secular system of thought. Predicatably,
when they started analysing the events of the Prophet's life
and the history of Islam, they were greatly influenced by
this system, hence their straying far from the truth. For
the rationalism of the European mind cannot yield any sound
results when dealing with the history of the Prophets and
the revealed religions which emerged in the East, or whose
history and civilisation had a lasting influence. The best
critique of this method is the one prepared by the French
Muslim Orientalist Etien Dient, in whose book - There is a
Big Gulf between You and Us, he refutes the ideas of the
Jesuit Lamces. Dient's following words are to the point
here:
“The Orientalists who tried to criticize the life of the
Prophet (PBUH) in this entirely European manner have spent
three quarters of a century carefully investigating and
scrutinising documents, as well as making allegations so as
to undermine the validity of what the majority of Muslims
accepted as being the correct account of the Prophet's life.
They should have been able, after these long and thorough
investigations, to refute the asserted opinions and
well-known accounts of the Prophet's life. Have they been
capable of achieving some of their aims? The answer is that
they have been unable to prove the least new elements.
... However, when we carefully examine the new views
advanced by these Orientalists, we find that they are
confusing and chosen at random. More than that, the authors
contradict each other or even themselves in what they
allege.
... If we want to shed light on these contradictions, we
will spend far too much time, without being able to get any
facts about the life and conduct of the Prophet (PBUH).
Thus, the only choice we have is to look at the writings of
the Arabs about the Prophet's life.
... As to the authors who allegedly state that they wanted
to produce a biography of the Prophet (PBUH), using a very
scientific method, they did not agree on any important
point. In spite of their supposed investigations and
revelations, they were only able to come up in this
biography with characters who were not any better rooted in
reality than the ones found in the stories written by Walter
Scott and Alexander Dumas. For these storytellers imagined
people belonging to their own society, people whom they
could understand and among whom they noticed only a
difference in terms of roles. As to these Orientalists, they
seem to have forgotten that they had first of all to fill
the wide gap between their Western mentality and that of the
Oriental people they dealt with. For, without giving due
attention to this observation, they would be in the wrong
all along”(3).
The Denial of the Prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH):
The majority of the Orientalists deny the fact that Muhammad
(PBUH) is a Prophet sent by Allah to deliver His Divine
Message. They fumble in their interpretation of Revelation,
for some attribute it to epileptic fits, some impute it to
mental illness, and others to fantasies that filled his
mind. It seems as if God has never sent any messenger
whatsoever, and as if these Orientalists have never heard
about the fact that the Prophets received their messages
from God. Since all these Orientalists (both Jewish and
Christian) acknowledge the existence of the Israeli Prophets
and God's Revealed Messages to them, their rejection of the
Prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH) is the result of their
obstinacy and haughtiness, both of which are firmly anchored
in their religious fanaticism.
The Denial of the Divine Origin of the Holy Quran:
In addition to their denial of Muhammad's prophethood,
Orientalists reject the fact that the Quran is a revealed
book. When they are dumbfounded by the historical facts it
reports about the ancient peoples, facts that could not have
come from an illiterate person, such as Muhammad (PBUH),
they allege what the Unbelievers in the Jahiliya (the
pre-Islamic Arabs) alleged before them, namely that the
Prophet received this information from other people. Then,
when they are dumbfounded by the Quran's references to
scientific truths that had neither been known nor discovered
until modern times, they attribute this to the Prophet's
intelligence and genius.
The Denial of the Divine Origin of Islam:
Similarly, these Orientalists deny the fact that Islam is a
revealed religion and go on alleging that it was fabricated
by Muhammad (PBUH), who patched it up from Judaism,
Christianity and pre-Islamic paganism in Arabia. Yet they do
not present any evidence supported by genuine scientific
research to substantiate their claim. Theirs are no more
than claims based on a few similarities either between Islam
and the two other monotheistic religions, or between it and
some of the ancient traditions and rituals pertaining to
Arab paganism.
The limitations of the way the Orientalists dealt with the
biography of the Prophet (PBUH) can be summed up as follows:
1. Recourse to selectiveness in their choice of sources and
their drawing of material from them. For they use only what
best serves their purposes.
2. Extreme bias which bespeaks their deep-rooted hostility
to Islam and hatred for it.
3. Tendency to exaggerate some events, while minimising
others.
4. Passing dangerous judgements on the Messenger of Allah
(PBUH), his Companions, the Muslim religion, Islamic law,
history and civilisation, with no evidence provided
whatsoever.
5. Excessive use of the materialist model and its norms when
studying the life of the Prophet (PBUH) and the events
relating to it.
6. Interpretation and analysis of events in a manner that is
not objective at all.
7. Reliance on less-reliable sources.
8. Daring to interpret Quranic Verses according to their
whims, while neglecting the standard commentaries on the
Holy Quran.
Sources for the Prophet's life:
The two authors of "The Prophet's Life" in the Encyclopedia
of Islam state that there are many diverse sources for the
life of Muhammad (PBUH), the most important of which is The
Holy Quran, which not only always coincides clearly with the
actual changes and conditions prevailing at the time of the
Prophet (PBUH), but also abounds in facts and allusions to
events in his life. Then, they assert that the most commonly
used sources in this respect, in addition to The Holy Quran,
date back to the third and fourth centuries of the Hegira.
The two authors supply interesting information about the
sources for the Prophet's life, but there are some points,
in their text, which still need further clarification,
discussion, and revision. Our discussion here will focus on
two points:
1. their consideration of The Holy Quran as the primary
source for the life of Muhammad (PBUH);
2. their consideration of the third and fourth centuries as
the periods during which the most influential books on the
life of the Prophet (PBUH) were written.
As to the first point, The Holy Quran is truly the first and
predominant source for the life of the Prophet (PBUH). This
is an unquestionable fact. But the two authors treat the
Quran as a historical record which not only depicts the
events of the Prophet's life in detail, but also plainly
reflects his character and the different stages of his
intellectual, spiritual and political development, in a
manner not unlike the way intellectual and literary outputs
reflect the distinctive scientific and intellectual
characteristics of a scholar, or a literary figure or
leader.
These ideas need to be discussed, for they are premised on
the belief that The Holy Quran was written by the Prophet
(PBUH, emanated from his personality and was in harmony with
the events of his life. Though we approve of the fact that
The Holy Quran is the predominant source of information on
the messenger's life, we do not accept the view that it is a
historical record which supplies a detailed account of his
life, because The Quran is not a historical book. On the
contrary, it is a Text that guides and sets the rules. Allah
has revealed it to guide people to that which will not only
improve their individual and social lives, but also help
them understand the purpose of their existence, and
establish an equitable system that ensures a decent life for
every human being and shields him from oppression and
aggression.
Therefore, we should not expect the Quran to present
historical events in a detailed manner, or to provide a
complete account of the Prophet's life. For the Quranic
Verses themselves are not arranged in the Holy Book
according to the sequence of their revelation. Moreover, it
is difficult to know the reason for the revelation of many
Verses, either because nothing was reported about them, or
because of contradictions in the reported accounts.
This is why it is not appropriate to consider the Quran as a
historical book, a record of the Prophet's life or a mirror
of the development of his character and career, in spite of
the fact that there are implicit and explicit references to
some of the actual events of his life in the Holy Book :
"[Anyone who claims] that the Quran reflects the
intellectual development of the Prophet (PBUH) or depicts
the progressive maturity of his views, ideas and teachings
attributes to the Quran what it does not report. For the
Quran is a Divine Revelation from Allah to His Messenger,
whom He commanded to read His Holy Book, transmit it to
people and live according to its instructions. The Prophet
(PBUH) has nothing to do with the Quran, except that he
received it from Allah and delivered it to people. Hence, it
is not permissible to consider it as a mirror of his
character nor as a reflection of his life. Neither the two
authors who wrote about Muhammad (PBUH) in The Encyclopedia
of Islam, nor others had any historical or scientific
evidence that would prove what they claimed about the
consideration of the Quran as a record of the historical
events in the life of the Prophet (PBUH)".(...)
"It is well-known that the authorship of some sacred texts
are attributed to their originators or to those who wrote
them down, as it is the case with the teachings of Confucius
and the Biblical texts of Matthew, Marcus, Lucas and John.
Having considered the Quran like these texts, some European
Orientalists and scholars allege that the Prophet (PBUH) is
the author of the Holy Book. Such a claim may be considered
as a mere personal opinion of some Orientalists."(4)
Namely, those who were influenced by their own religious
culture. Yet, this does not definitely apply to the Quran.
Scientific and intellectual evidences which prove that the
Quran is a Revealed Book and that it cannot to be the
product of a human mind are well-known, there is no need to
dwell on them here.
As to the claim of the two scholars who wrote about the life
of Muhammad (PBUH) in The Encyclopedia of Islam that the
Quran is a historical record of the events in the life of
the Prophet (PBUH), it is utterly wrong. They have made many
mistakes, among which is their questioning of the existence
of several major events in the life of the Prophet (PBUH)
during the Meccan Period; they even go to the extent of
considering them as false despite the fact that the
authorities in the fields of study of the Hadith, the life
of the Prophet (PBUH) and the history of Islam have all
agreed to the truth of these events (This issue will be
dealt with in detail later). Secondly, there is the two
scholars' strange interpretation of some Holy Verses, which
completely differs from what is reported in the books of
exegesis - both Old and New. Thirdly, there is also their
claim that the mission of the Prophet (PBUH) in Mecca was
restricted to warning Arab people, and that he was not
thinking then of founding a new religion, etc. There are
other errors which will be corrected later, Allah willing.
These errors stem from the fact that the Quran does not
mention these events or dwell on these meanings, as well as
from the two authors' neglect of other Verses which do not
chime with their own opinions.
The Disregard of the Prophetic Traditions:
Strange though it may seem, neither of the two scholars, who
wrote about the Prophet's life in The Encyclopedia of Islam,
paid the least attention to the Prophetic Traditions. They
did not draw upon these texts which contain attested facts
and accounts which provide ample and detailed information on
the life of Muhammad (PBUH), his career and the different
stages of his Call to Islam, despite their complaint about
the difficulty of getting reliable historical data. We may
wonder what made them entirely reject the Prophetic
Traditions which are of paramount importance in this
respect, and prompt them to look for information in the Holy
Quran's hidden allusions, hints and terse implied meanings?
More curious still is their disregard of the Prophetic
Traditions, while trying to find historical evidence in
Islamic and pre-Islamic poetry. However, it is generally
accepted that a genuine scientific method requires that a
scholar should not rely on poetry in his attempt to prove or
disprove the validity of historical events, so long as more
reliable and authentic sources are available. Therefore, the
two scholars should have drawn on the Prophetic Traditions,
because the elements of the biography of Muhammad (PBUH)
reported in these texts have been authenticated. The rule is
that all the information concerning the life of the Prophet
(PBUH) available in these authentic Prophetic Traditions is
given top priority over what is reported in the accounts of
the Prophet's wars (Al-Maghazi), his biography and history;
so how about poetry?
The reason is that the Prophetic Traditions contain attested
information which is the fruit of enormous efforts made by
the authorities in the field in their subjection of the
Traditions to severe scrutiny in terms of both ascription
and solidity. Such close examination and critique were not
reserved for the other sources. Therefore, we notice that
the two scholars did not respect the requirements of genuine
scientific research, for they disregard the Prophetic
Traditions, while giving priority to the War Accounts,
historical books and collections of poems.
It is worth noting that because of their specialisation, the
Prophetic Traditions do not give ample information about the
military expeditions and the biography of Muhammad (PBUH);
therefore, the Traditions do not provide a complete picture
of the Prophet's life; the gap can be filled by turning to
the specialised books on his life.
What has been said about the value of the Prophetic
Traditions does not depreciate the value of the War Accounts
and biographies ; these are ranked immediately after the
Holy Quran and the authentic Prophetic Traditions, as far as
their scientific and historical value is concerned.
What enhances the value and the regard given to the "books
on wars" (Al-Maghazi) is that most of their authors, who
were among the early followers of the Prophet (PBUH) and
those who immediately came after them, were authorities in
the field of the Prophetic Traditions; the Ulemas testified
to their trustworthiness and righteousness. Among these
authors are Aban Ibn Uthman Ibn 'Affan (d. 110 H.), a
reliable Hadith reporter and early follower (d. 94 H.), same
as Aban and also one of the eminent theologian in Madina; 'Aamer
Ibn Sharhabil Acha'abi (d. 103 H.) - a reliable Hadith
reporter and author of Kitab Al-Maghazi (A Book on Wars);
A'assem Ibn 'Umar ben Qatada (d. 119 H.) - a reliable Hadith
reporter; Muhammad ben Muslim ben Shihab Az-Zuhri (d. 124
H.), an eminent Hadith reporter and a reliable authority for
the most brilliant 'Ulemas of the Impugnment and Amendment
of the Prophetic Traditions; Mussa Ibn 'Uqba (d. 140 H.), a
reliable Hadith reporter and disciple of Az-Zuhri; Imam
Malek praised his Book on Wars (Al-Maghazi), saying that "It
is the most reliable in the field"; Yahya Ibn Mui'in also
says, "Mussa Ibn 'Uqba's book on Az-Zuhri is the most
reliable in this field"; Imam Shafi'i corroborates this as
he says : "None of the Books on Wars is more reliable than
Mussa Ibn 'Uqba's book, in spite of its small size and lack
of most of the information found in the works of other
authors"; and finally, Muhammad Ibn Ishaq (d. 151 H.), one
of Az-Zuhri's disciples and authority on Wars, but his
accounts do not all rank as reliable; however, 'Ulemas
agreed to ranking them as good on condition that the
authorities on which they were related be attested. There
are many testimonies in works specialising in the science of
the Hadith which assert his honesty and the reliability of
his accounts on the Prophet's life(5).
There is a wrong tendency among some Orientalists, who are
imitated by some Muslim historians, to overvalue the "Book
on Wars" by Al-Waqidi, giving it precedence over the
Prophet's biography by Ibn Ishaq. Actually, the latter's
book is both more accurate and more reliable, for the
information it provides coincides with that reported in the
Prophetic Traditions in many respects.
As to Al-Waqidi, the 'Ulama judge him as less accurate,
stating that he should not be relied on, especially when he
is the only one to report a given event.
The "Books on Wars" (Al-Maghazi) and the biography of the
Prophet (PBUH) have their scientific value which
necessitates our reliance on them, but they do not all have
the same level of accuracy and validity.
To conclude our discussion of the attitude of the two
scholars of The Encyclopedia article on the Prophet (PBUH),
we should wonder why they disregarded the reliable sources
on the life of Muhammad (PBUH) and the Prophetic Traditions,
and why they drew on the writings of the missionaries and
Orientalists (both ancient and modern) about the Prophet
and Muslim history, in spite of the fact that most of these
authors had very little knowledge of the actual events of
the Prophet’s life, its sources and spirit. This is the
reason why their texts are of little value. Some of these
authors are fair while others are biased. Some wrote in the
vein of fanaticism and open hostility, so much so that their
texts have nothing to do with the spirit of scientific
research and objectivity.
It should be remarked that the two scholars do not
distinguish between the fair and the biased among the
Orientalists. They rather seem to draw on the prejudiced. It
is evident that scientific integrity requires that a scholar
should shun in his study of a personality all the elements
he gets from its enemies and opponents.
What is strange about missionaries and Orientalists is that
they take for granted the discredited accounts and the
apocryphal Judaic texts as long as they suit their purposes
and so long as they help them to validate any allegations
that please them, while considering the accurate accounts,
and even the most authentic ones, as being inferior and
fabricated, because the latter category of documents does
not lend credence to their forgeries.
Moreover, as they live in a materialistic society, it is
difficult for them to grasp the kind of spirit that Islam
teaches, a spirit which has been the guiding point of many
of the events and achievements in the life of the Muslims
since the time of Muhammad (PBUH). This spirit cannot be
understood through reading and consultation ; it can only be
acquired through a deep understanding and awareness of the
spirit of Islam and the extent to which this spirit is
embedded in the minds of those who contributed to the
development of Muslim history and civilization.
The ideas and judgements of some Orientalists have evolved
in the twentieth century, and their writings have become
fairer than those of their predecessors whose texts teem
with bias and ill-will, because of either the difference in
terms of religion and interest, the paucity of the resources
they had, their ignorance of the Arabic language, or the bad
quality of ancient translations. However, all modern
Orientalist texts are now free from falsehoods and
distortions. These are deliberate at times; and at others,
they are the result of misunderstanding historical facts.
For these and many other theological considerations, as well
as factors, that are not mentioned here, scientific
integrity requires the unbiased scholar to disregard all
that is written by the Orientalists on the life of the
Prophet (PBUH).
The Date on Which the Most Well-Known Books Dealing with the
Prophets’s Life were Written :
The author of “Muhammad : the Prophet of Islam” in The
Encyclopedia of Islam states that most of the commonly used
sources on the Prophet’s life date back to the third and
fourth centuries of the Hegira. He expresses this in a way
that would make the ordinary reader believe that the
biography of Muhammad (PBUH) was not written and recorded
until three centuries or more after the death of the Prophet
(PBUH). It is evident that such a hint would raise doubt
about the truth of the accounts, events and facts in these
books.
It should be noted here that the examination of the validity
of the sources by the author is very weak, indeed, not to
say inexistent, as his statment below shows :
The sources that are mostly used in the study of the
Prophet’s life, in addition to the Quran, were written
during the third and fourth centuries of Hegira and the most
famous source of all is the biography of Muhammad (PBUH) by
Ibn Ishaq (d. 151 H.).
However, the date of Ibn Ishaq’s death, as is reported here,
completely contradicts the authors’s statement. Obviously,
(151 H.) is mid - second century (Hegira), which means that
Ibn Ishaq’s book was written before his death; thus it
cannot be classified as a third or fourth century work.
Actually, writing on the Prophet’s life started in the
second part of the first century, and we have seen above
that the leading authors in this connection were among the
early followers of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), such as
Urwa Ibn Az-Zubair Ibn Al-Awam, Aban Ibn Uthman ben A’affan,
Acha’abi, Az-Zuhri, Mussa ben Uqba, and others who lived in
the first and second centuries.
For some reason, the author disregards the sources on the
life of the Prophet which were written before the third
century in spite of the fact that they are more accurate and
reliable than others. Their authors, as seen above, are
among Hadith Scholars who are well-known for their thorough
investigation of events and accuracy in relating them. The
science of Hadith criticism testify to this. Whatever the
case may be, the sources that the author disregards are
given precedence by the authorities on Hadith and the
biography of the Prophet over the ‘Tabaqat’ of Ibn Saad (d.
230H) on which he relied heavily. Ibn Saad subjected many of
his relations to close scrutiny, as is stated by AL-Khatib
Al-Baghadadi and Ibn Hajar AL-Aasqalan, but he drew on weak
sources, such as Al-Waqidi’s book on which he relied
heavily, so much so that he was accused of plagiarism by Ibn
An-Nadim(6).
(1) Surat As-Sad, Verse n° 8.
(2) Surat As-Sajda, Verse n° 18.
(3) Quoted from Hader Al-‘Alam Al Islami (The Muslim World
today) by the American author Luthrop. Tr. By A‘ajjad Nuihid,
commentated and annotated by Shakib Arsalan. Dar Al-Fikr.
Beirut. 3rd edition, 1971 : the quote is attributed to the
French Orientalist Etien Dient, who converted to Islam and
wrote a book on the Prophet (PBUH).
(4) See the magazine Al-Islam Al-Yawm, which is published by
ISESCO, n° 14. “Muraja‘at Madat “Muhammad” in the
Encyclopedia of Islam”, by Dr. Anis Ahmad. p. 62.
(5) Akram Diya Al-'Umari, As-Sira An-Nabawiya As-Sahiha, pp.
51-56.
(6) Ibid., pp. 61-66.
|
