I accept the Siras (Ibn Ishaq and Tabari) and Hadiths (Bukhari) as authorative sources of information about Mohammed. They're doubly relevant not just because they're presumed to be accurate, but because Muslims revere these as guides for Islamic law, life and morality.
And unfortunately, its these sources that contain the negative material on Mohammed.
You'll notice everything negative I posted are quotations from Ishaq, Tabari or Bukhari.
------------------
In Islamic sciences or the Sharia, sirat means the study of the life of the Muhammad. It is the study of his life and all that is related to him.[1]
.....
.. the sirat literature is concerned primarily with the narrative of Muhammad's life, whereas the intent of the hadith literature is to assemble his sayings as an authoritative source for Islamic law. The immediate relevance of many hadith sayings to legal debates made it more important that they be accompanied by isnads.
Together the sirat and the hadith constitute the sunnah, or prophetic example which has formed the basis of many practices shared by traditional Muslim communities around the world.
Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah is the earliest surviving traditional biography, and was written just over 150 years after Muhammad's death. It survives in the later editions of Ibn Hisham and al-Tabari. There are a few important differences between these, however. For example, al-Tabari includes the controversial episode of the Satanic Verses, while Ibn Hisham does not.
......
answers.com
Sahih al-Bukhari (Arabic: ???? ????????), as it is commonly referred to, is one of the six canonical hadith collections of Sunni Islam. These prophetic traditions, or hadith, were collected by the Persian Muslim scholar Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari (810–870 AD) 194–256 H (about 200 years after Muhammad died) and compiled during his lifetime. Most Muslims view this as their most trusted collection of hadith and it is considered the most authentic book after the Qur'an.[1] Sahih translates as authentic or correct.[2]
.....
en.wikipedia.org
So when Ishaq, Tabari, Bukhari present horrific information about Mohammed, its damning imo. When they present him as a bandit, torturer, rapist etc, it can't be written off as anti-Islamic propaganda.
Worst of all, is that these sources are considered holy and guides to morality and behavior. Muslims who go back to these sources have to spin the info .... okay, Mohammed raided and stole, and had people tortured to reveal where treasure was hidden, beheaded entire tribes, had sex with the surviving women immediately thereafter ..... but it was okay.
-----------------------------------------
Ishaq:288 "Allah divided the booty stolen from the first caravan after he made spoils permissible. He gave four-fifths to those He had allowed to take it and one-fifth to His Apostle."
and
Ishaq:289 "Muhammad summoned the Muslims and said, 'This is the Quraysh caravan containing their property. Go out and attack it. Perhaps Allah will give it to us as prey."
and
TABARI VII:29 "Abu Sufyan and the horsemen of the Quraysh were returning from Syria following the coastal road. When Allah’s Apostle heard about them he called his companions together and told them of the wealth they had with them and the fewness of their numbers. The Muslims set out with no other object than Sufyan and the men with him. They did not think that this raid would be anything other than easy booty."
and
TABARI VIII:122Ishaq:515
"Abi Huqayq held the treasure of the Nadir. He was brought to Allah's Messenger, and he questioned him. But Huqayq denied knowing where it was. So the Prophet questioned other Jews. One said, 'I have seen Kinanah walk around a ruin.' Muhammad had Kinanah brought to him and said, 'Do you know that if we find it, I shall kill you.' 'Yes,' Kinanah answered. The Prophet commanded that the ruin should be dug up. Some treasure was extracted. Then Muhammad asked Kinanah for the rest. He refused to surrender it; so Allah's Messenger gave orders concerning him to Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah's chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him."
Ishaq:517 "When the Apostle took Safiyah on his way out of town, she was beautified and combed, putting her in a fitting state for the Messenger. The Apostle passed the night with her in his tent. Abu Ayyub, girt with his sword, guarded the Apostle, going round the tent until he saw him emerge in the morning. Abu said, 'I was afraid for you with this woman for you have killed her father, her husband, and her people."
TABARI VIII:117: "Dihyah had asked the Messenger for Safiyah when the Prophet chose her for himself. Muhammad gave Dihyah her two cousins instead." Ishaq:511 "When he protested, wanting to keep Safiyah for himself, the Apostle traded for Safiyah by giving Dihyah her two cousins. The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims."
Bukhari:V5B59N524 "The Muslims said among themselves, 'Will Safiyah be one of the Prophet's wives or just a lady captive and one of his possessions?'"
TABARI VIII:110 "When Abu Sufyan learned that the Prophet had taken her, he said, 'That stallion's nose is not to be restrained!'"
Bukhari:V4B52N143V5B59N523 "When we reached Khaybar, Muhammad said that Allah had enabled him to conquer them. It was then that the beauty of Safiyah was described to him. Her husband had been killed [by Muhammad], so Allah's Apostle selected her for himself. He took her along with him till we reached a place where her menses were over and he took her for his wife, consummating his marriage to her, and forcing her to wear the veil.'"
There is much more like this in these sources. These are just a few lurid examples.
|
