Template:Muslims and controversies

This is a sub-article to Criticism of Islam.

Criticism of Muhammad has existed since ancient times, when he was frequently demonized in European polemic. In modern times, Muhammad has been criticized for a number of things including his alleged forced marriage, sexual activities, military expeditions, and involvement in slavery.

Non-Muslim criticism of Muhammad

During the time of Muhammad^[1] and later in Middle Ages, Jewish writers commonly referred to Muhammad as ha-meshuggah ("the madman" or "possessed"), a title contemptuously used in the Hebrew Bible for impostors who think of themselves as prophets.^[2]

Christians were also often dismissive of Muhammad, many producing negative and inflammatory accounts of his life that were claimed to be deliberately "malicious".^[3] False reports on Muhammad's life and death includes reports circulated by Christian writers that Muhammad died while being drunk, or was killed by pigs. Such stories and opinions were circulated with the knowledge that Islam forbids both alcohol and pork. Such caricatures of Muhammad extended to works of literature and poetry. In Dante's Inferno, Muhammad and Ali are portrayed as being in Hell, subject to horrifying tortures and punishments for their sins of schism and sowing discord. In the Middle Ages Islam was widely believed to be a heresy of Christianity. In other works, he is described as a "renegade cardinal of the Catholic Church who decided to start his own false religion".^[4] A less belligerent depiction occurs in 13th century Estoire del Saint Grail, the first book in the vast Arthurian cycle, the Lancelot-Grail. Here, Muhammad is portrayed as a true prophet sent by God to bring Christianity to the pagan Middle East; however, his pride causes him to alter God's wishes and he deceives his followers, though his religion is viewed as vastly superior to paganism.^[5]

Martin Luther referred to Muhammad as "a devil and first-born child of Satan".^[6] Maracci, who translated the Qur'an into Latin in 1698, held that Muhammad and Islam were not very dissimilar to Luther and Protestantism.^[6] Gottfried Leibniz, while praising Muhammad and his followers for spreading monotheism and "abolishing heathen superstitions" in the remote lands where Christianity had not been carried, holds that belief in Muhammad, Zoroaster, Brahma, or 'Somonacodom' is not as worthy as belief in Moses and Jesus.^[7] The Catholic Encyclopedia (1911) states that Muhammad was inspired by an "imperfect understanding" of Judaism and Christianity.^[6]

Gabriel Oussani in Catholic Encyclopedia states that the views of Luther and those who call Muhammad a 'wicked impostor', 'dastardly liar' and a 'willful deceiver' are an "indiscriminate abuse" and are "unsupported by facts: Instead, nineteenth-century Western scholars such as Sprenger, Noldeke, Weil, Muir, Koelle, Grimme and Margoliouth give us a more correct and unbiased estimate of Muhammad's life and character, and substantially agree as to his motives, prophetic call, personal qualifications, and sincerity."^[6] Muir, Marcus Dods, and others have suggested that Muhammad was at first sincere but later became deceptive. Koelle finds "the key to the first period of Muhammad's life in Khadija, his first wife," after whose death he became prey to his "evil passions."^[6] William Montgomery Watt, on the other hand, has stated his belief that there are no solid grounds for the view that Muhammad's character declined after Muhammad went to Medina. He argues that "in both Meccan and Medinan periods Muhammad's contemporaries looked on him as a good and upright man, and in the eyes of history he is a moral and social reformer."^[8]

Zwemer, a Christian missionary, criticised the life of Muhammad on various grounds; first by the standards of the Old and New Testaments, second by the pagan morality of his Arab compatriots, and last, by the new law which he brought. Zwemer suggests Muhammad defied Arab ethical traditions, and that he personally violated the strict sexual morality of his own moral system. Quoting Johnstone, Zwemer concludes by claiming that his harsh judgment rests on evidence which "comes all from the lips and the pens of his [i.e. Muhammad's] own devoted adherents."^[9]

Contemporary critics such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali have criticized Muhammad for preaching beliefs that are incompatible with democracy, and Ali has called him a "tyrant". ^[10] Daniel Pipes sees Muhammad as a politician, stating that "because Muhammad created a new community, the religion that was its raison d'etre had to meet the political needs of its adherents."^[11] Ibn Warraq, another critic, laments that "unfortunately, as he gained in confidence and increased his political and military power, so the story goes, Muhammad turned from being a persuader to being a legislator, warrior, and dictator."^[12]

Muhammad's marriages

The fact that the Quran exempts Muhammad from laws concerning polyagmy and the like has been a source of controversy. The fact that several Islamic sources state that Muhammad (aged over 50) consummated the marriage to his youngest wife while she was only 9 years old has also been a source of controversy (see below).

Aisha

Muhammad's marriage to Aisha is particularly controversial, mainly because of her age during the marriage. The hadith collections of Bukhari (d. 870) and Muslim b. al-Hajjaj (d. 875) are in general regarded as the most authentic by Sunni Muslims. Both quote Aisha herself claiming she was six or seven at the time of her marriage and nine when the marriage was consummated. D A Spellberg states that in Ibn Sa'd, the age of Aisha at marriage varies between six and seven.^[13] She stayed in her parents' home till she had reached puberty at nine (or maybe ten according to Ibn Hisham) and then her marriage with Muhammad was consummated.^[14][13] Spellberg states that "all these references to the Aisha's age reinforce Aisha's pre-menarcheal status, and, implicitly her virginity."^[13]

The age of Aisha is of particular concern to non-Muslims, who denounce Muhammad for having sexual relations with a girl so young. Ayaan Hirsi Ali has called Muhammad a "pervert" for marrying a girl as young as six. Jerry Vines has called Muhammad a "pedophile".^[15] Colin Turner, a professor of Persian language and Islamic history, however states that Muhammad's marriage in its context was not in the least improper. Such marriages between an older man and a young girl were customary among Bedouins as they still are in many societies across the world. Coulin further writes that Arabs in the seventh century tended to reach adulthood at an earlier age than Westerners today.^[16]

Some claim that Muhammad's example encourages the practice of child marriage in Muslim communities. Ibn Warraq writes that "child marriages continue to be practiced, and the fact that the Prophet himself married Aisha when she was only nine and he was fifty-three encourages Muslim society to continue with this iniquitous custom."^[17]

There is considerable debate among Muslim scholars over Aisha's age at marriage. Maulana Muhammad Ali makes a detailed historical argument that Aisha could not have been more than nine or ten at the time of betrothal, and fifteen at marriage.^[18] Others fix her age at consummation as late as nineteen.^[19] Muqtedar Khan also concurs with Shanavas, who argues that there are different reports within the Islamic sources about the age of Aisha at the time of marriage.^[20][21] A majority of scholars accept the traditional account of Aisha being married at the age of nine. Some respond to criticism of the young marriage by arguing that she had reached puberty by then,^[22] while others argue that she was older than nine at marriage. In an effort to show that Aisha's marriage was not unusual, defenders point out that early marriages were common in most cultures until fairly recent times.^[23] In medieval Britain, "Girlhood was brief. Women were marriageable at twelve and usually married by fourteen. Heiresses might be married in form as young as five and betrothed even younger..."^[24] Some cite an account in Christian apocryphal writings that claims that Mary, mother of Jesus, was between the ages of twelve and fourteen at the time of her marriage to a ninety-year old Joseph; however, many churches see these works as suspicious or unreliable for various reasons.^[25] Also, even when those stories were widely believed, it was also believed that the marriage was never consummated.^[26]

Zaynab bint Jahsh

Muhammad has been criticized for marrying Zaynab bint Jahsh, the divorced wife of his adopted son.^[27] Watt, however, holds that Muhammad didn't marry Zaynab for sexual desire, but that this marriage was mainly a "political act in which an undesirable practice of 'adoption' belonging to a lower moral level was ended".

Safiyya bint Huyayy

Safiyya bint Huyayy was a Jewish woman captured from the Banu Nadir tribe at age 17 who became Muhammad's eleventh wife.^[28] Muhammad took her into his bed the same day he killed her husband after torturing him to extract information about his tribe's treasure.^[29] Some critics are of the opinion that this could be termed as rape, since a woman whose husband had been killed by Muhammad would be unlikely to take interest in him. ^[30]

Violence

There have been several incidents recorded in Islamic histories and hadith that have served as the basis for criticisms of Muhammad's alleged cruel and unforgiving behavior in war. Muhammad's dealings with his Jewish contemporaries has been an issue in particular. Moroccan liberal Abdelhamid Assassi writes: "At first, Muhammad used to pray in the direction of Jerusalem, in order to seek the sympathy and support of the Jews in the Peninsula, who carried great economic and social weight. Then he traded the Jews' direction of prayer for that of the pagans, in order to rally the Arab tribes to his preaching. For this reason he later took revenge on the Jews by expelling them, slaughtering them, robbing them, and taking their women as wives.^[32]

Ibn Ishaq (d. 761) relates that, while in a certain town, Muhammad gave license to his men to "kill any Jew who falls into your power." In short order, Muhayyisa ibn Mas'ud slayed a Jewish merchant named Ibn Sunayna. When Muhayyisa's brother Huwayyisa confronted him about the deed, he boasted that "had Muhammad commanded him to murder his (Muhayyisa's) brother, he would have done so." This display of faith caused Huwayyisa to convert to Islam on the spot, proclaiming that "any religion that can bring you to this is indeed wonderful!"^[33] (This story is partially corroborated in a hadith [3]).

Ibn Warraq believes this illustrates a "ruthless fanaticism into which the teaching of the Prophet was fast drifting."^[34] Scholar Daniel W. Brown concurs with this story, but does not pass judgment.^[35] In response, some Muslims question the reliability of the hadith in which the story appears (specifically, claiming that its isnad is weak). They also claim that Ibn Hisham, a disciple of Ibn Ishaq who edited his work, questioned Ishaq's timing of the incident, casting doubt on the story's accuracy as a whole.^[36] Also, in answering criticisms of this type, some Muslim scholars argue that Muhammad's actions disqualify him as God's spokesman only if such actions also disqualify men like Joshua, or conversely compare Muhammad favorably with Old Testament figures like Joshua^[37][38] However, Joshua was chiefly a military leader, not a moral leader and definitely not the greatest prophet to be emulated like Moses in Judaism or Jesus in Christianity. Muhammed on the other hand is seen as the greatest prophet in Islam.

Muhammad is also criticised for the massacre of Banu Qurayza, a Jewish tribe of Medina. The tribe was accused of having engaged in treasonous agreements with the enemies besieging Medina in the Battle of the Trench in 627.^[39][40] Ibn Ishaq writes that Muhammad approved the beheading of some 600-900 individuals who surrendered unconditionally after a siege that lasted several weeks.^[31] (Also see Bukhari Template:Bukhari-usc) (Yusuf Ali notes that the Qur'an discusses this battle in verses ^{[Quran 33:10]}).^[41] The women and children were sold into slavery. According to Norman Stillman, the incident cannot be judged by present-day moral standards. Citing Deut. 20:13-14 as an example, Stillman states that the slaughter of adult males and the enslavement of women and children, though bitter, was common practice throughout the ancient world.^[42] According to Rudi Paret, the adverse public opinion was more a point of concern to Muhammad when he had some date palms cut down during a siege than after this incident.^[43] Esposito, aiming at understanding the incident in its historical context, also argues that in Muhammad's time traitors were executed and alleging similar situations in the Bible.^[44]

A few Muslim scholars, such as W. N. Arafat and Barakat Ahmad, have disputed the historicity of the incident.^[45] Ahmad, argues that only the leaders of the tribe were killed. (see his thesis)^[46] Arafat argued that Ibn Ishaq gathered information from descendants of the Qurayza Jews, who embellished or manufactured the details of the incident.^[47][48] Watt finds Arafat's arguments "not entirely convincing."^[49]

Another controversial story is that of an attack on a Jewish settlement called Khaybar. After its last fort was taken by Muhammad and his men, the chief of the Jews, called Kinana ibn al-Rabi, was asked by Muhammad to reveal the location of some hidden treasure. When he refused, Muhammad ordered a man to torture Kinana, and the man "kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead." Kinana was then beheaded, and Muhammad took his young wife Safiyya bint Huyayy ^[50]According to Al-Bukhari, Muslims wondered if she was to be a concubine or a wife to Muhammad, and speculated that if he ordered her to veil herself, she will be one of the "Mothers of the Believers" (one of his wives), but if he does not, then she would become a concubine of his. Muhammad threw his own mantle on her, and took her for wife.^[51] Some think that Muhammad married Safiyya as part of a deal to conclude a peace treaty.^[52] Muslim scholar Maulana Muhammad Ali holds that Muhammad married the widowed Safiyya, who had supposedly already fallen into his hands as a captive, as a gesture of goodwill.^[53]

Critics take these events, especially the story of the torture of Kinana, to be another blot on Muhammad's character.^[54] Those few Western scholars who discuss the alleged torture of Kinana, like William Muir, do not question the validity of the story.^[55] Muslims generally dispute this incident. Some claim that this was yet another story that Ibn Ishaq heard second-hand from Jewish sources, casting doubt on its authenticity.^[56] Others argue that Kinana was killed in battle and never taken captive.^[57]

Ownership of slaves

Some scholars criticise the Islamic world for allegedly having allowed slavery to persist for some time after it was abolished in the West. Rodney Stark points to the example set by Muhammad as a possible reason for this, saying that "the fundamental problem facing Muslim theologians vis-a-vis the morality of slavery is that Muhammad bought, sold, captured, and owned slaves." Although he does admit that Muhammad "advise(d) that slaves be treated well," he contrasts Islam with Christianity, implying that Christian theologians wouldn't have been able to "work their way around the biblical acceptance of slavery" if Jesus had owned slaves like Muhammad did.^[58]

Muhammad is criticised for apparently having had a child by a slave girl called Maria or Mariyah, who was a present from the Byzantine ruler of Egypt. By some accounts Muhammad did not marry her because she would not convert to Islam,^[59] though other Islamic researchers claim that Muhammad was indeed married to Mariyah.^[60]

However, some defend Muhammad by highlighting his supposed fair treatment of slaves. For example, there was a slave called Zayd ibn Harithah, whom Muhammad freed and adopted. Zayd may have been the first male to convert to Islam, and later became a trusted companion to Muhammad. One early biography relates Muhammad as having said that "he (Zayd b. Harithah) was one of the dearest to me of all men."^[61] Additionally, some Muslims point to the following hadith as evidence that Muhammad saw all men as being equal under God:^[62]