Muhammad learned a lot from Jews, Christians and Pagans about their religions and and rituals. He migrated to Medina for security and travelled to Syria for business. During that time he got many opportunities to meet people who believed in monotheism. Except 72 virgins part, many parts of Islam, from Genesis to circumcision, were stolen from other religions and rituals.
Jews lived in Medina. Most probably Muhammad liked the way Jews celebrated their Yom Kippur or Rosh Hashanah. He wanted to create something for his followers so they would not feel that they were deprived of fun and recreation. Anas bin Malik says, ‘When the Prophet arrived in Medina, he found people celebrating two specific days in which they used to entertain themselves with recreation and merriment. He asked them about the nature of these festivities at which they replied that these days were occasions of fun and recreation. At this, the Prophet remarked that the Almighty has fixed two days [of festivity] instead of these for you which are better than these: Eid al-fitr and Eid al-adha.’ (From Tirmidhi Hadith)
Muhammad celebrated the first Eid in 624 with his friends and followers just after the victory at the battle of Ghazwa -e-Badar. Not many people celebrated Eid when Muhammad was alive. Two billion people, followers of an illiterate shepherd-cum-camel driver-cum-war monger-cum-creator of a religion, now celebrate Eid in the Twenty-First Century! The world looks big but it is actually a small world filled with a bunch of superstitious tribes and clans.
Yom Kippur and Eid
Being illiterate, Muhammad had to rely on word-of-mouth descriptions of other religions’ beliefs, hence the glaring errors in his interpretations of texts taken from the Bible and Torah. Such is the way new religions, their ceremonies and their festivals arise, all as mistaken and baseless as the ones that went before.
The human brain seems to be deteriorating when so many follow the ideas of so-called prophets who were themselves little more than self-important, delusional illiterates, probably suffering from brain related diseases that caused their delusions in the first place. And for the human animal, without a brain capable of coping with new and challenging situations by developing new and original solutions, extinction beckons.
Richard Carrier stated that Muhamed as a scion of a wealthy tribe would hardly have been illiterate. What evidence do we have?
Regarding Christianityy, the version Muhamed was familiar with wasn’t any of today’s but something like nestorianism. Hence his claim their was only one gospel. And the gnostic claim that Jesus wasn’t crucified, but a body double was.
I prefer to read early biography of Muhammad to get authentic information about him. Sirat Rasul Allah, the earliest biography of Muhammad, by Ibn Ishaq wriiten 200 years after Muhammad’s death is a good source of information.
Thanks Taslima. Is that biography disinterested? Or does it have a propaganda purpose?
I think the gospels were written about 100 years after Jesus lived, if he lived, and they’re full of propaganda and make believe, so I wonder how much faith one can have in a biography written by a believer 200 years after the fact?
Earlier biographers did not try to hide the facts that Muhammad lied or married a 6-year-old child, or raped Jewish girls, or allowed wife beating. They thought whatever Muhammad did was good. But the contemporary biographers in today’s reformed society try to hide the bad things he did, because these biographers know that rape, child marriage, wife beating are not good and people won’t like to know that the prophet was a pedophile or a liar or a rapist. Modern Islamic scholars are busy making new interpretations of the Quran and the Hadith to make Islam look good.
Ok, still are there any bios by infidels?
How do today’s Muslims square the circle? I mean Muhamed was a murdering, pirate pedophile rapist according to their own scriptures, and yet he is supposed to be an example to all humans, the perfect or near perfect man.
Dear Sister, Would you please help me providing the source where I can read this early biography of Muhammad written by Ibn Ishak ? I also like to read Hadith of ancient edition. Thanks.
Hat’s off…
I’m a guy who is free from so called religion…. So don’t misunderstand me due to my name…
I don’t think the scriptures say anywhere that Muhammad was a pedophile. It appears to be a recent diagnosis of his mental condition done by modern people of today. Although the modern medial science has yet to make such leaps by which mentally diagnosing 1400+ year dead people would have become a possibility, it is happening nevertheless. We have people performing psychoanalysis on 1400+ year dead people. One guy has even written a book called ‘A Psycobiography of Muhammad’ or something similar, in which he finds no less than 5 mental disorders and at least 20 physical disorders, that when all put together, explain why Muhammad was what he was!
Going back to the scriptures, the scriptures say that he just married a little girl, which they further say, was quite a common practice back then. Plus, common sense suggest that if he was a pedophile, then most of his wives, or at least some of his wives, would have been little children, which they weren’t.
You say ‘he married a little girl’ I.e. a peadophile. He had sex with her at nine. Engaged at 6. Later you contradict yourself by saying ‘at least some would have been little children’. Aisha was her name I believe. No psychological analysis needed. He is today said to be a great example, and because of this in Iran it’s legal to marry a 9 year old girl. By today’s standards his actions are peadophilic and that is the example muslims are to aspire too?
If we go by the dictionary meaning, then yes, his act of marrying a child of 9 years of age would have made him a certified pedophile today. But when we look at that fact that most of his wives were not children, and that happened in a time when marrying young girls was perfectly OK and acceptable, we may come to a perfectly plausible assumption that if he was a pedophile indeed, then he would have had married more than one child, don’t you think? Who was stopping him from doing that? Having said that, the mere fact that he married just one child of 6 or 9 years of age, in a time when marrying young girls by mature adult men was fully acceptable, is not enough for him to be called a pedophile. There could be a hundred reasons why he married that girl, with sexual attraction toward children being one the least significant ones.
From a psychological point of view, we do need a psychoanalysis or a detailed mental diagnosis by a professional to assess a person’s mental health. And pedophilia is in fact a mental disorder.
Last but not least, does it make sense to apply today’s standards to a time that is loooooong passe? Some 1400+ years, give or take? Pedophilia is a mental disorder, being a pedophile is a crime today, but Muhammad did not live in today’s societies. Muslims following these rules makes sense, because they are bound by their religion, and not by Western laws or Western psychology. Plus, the fact that they are not much versed in Western psychology and Western laws, through no fault of their own, you can hardly blame them for their ignorance!
Khafre: “There could be a hundred reasons why he married that girl, with sexual attraction toward children being one the least significant ones. “
He didn’t just marry her while she was still a child, he also had sex with her while she was still a child. That is all you need to qualify as a paedophile.
“does it make sense to apply today’s standards to a time that is loooooong passe? Some 1400+ years, give or take? “
It does if billions of people today are in all seriousness venerating someone from 1400 years ago as the perfect example of how to live your life.
If a man has sex with a 9 year old once, but has many adult partners, he’s a paedophile. Or would a man have 2 have sex with two 9 year olds before he qualified? 3 perhaps?
Your moral relativism is interesting. As many Christians were involved in the inquisition during the middle ages are we wrong to call the torture and killing of heretics bad? I mean it wasn’t just one priest or cardinal or hired goon invoked. It certainly was sanctioned but church and civil society.
Of course, in the last hundred years people have been involved in many genocides, resulting in many millions of deaths. Are we wrong to call hitler, Mao, or any lower member of such societies bad because it was industrial scale and sanctioned by the states involved.
I don’t think it anachronistic to call out behaviour that I believe wrong, whenever it happened. And given the ongoing influence of some actors….
Yes, he did have sex with Aisha while she was still a child. But since being a Pedophile is defined as having sexual attractiveness toward children and not a particular child only, it makes sense that if he was indeed a pedophile, we’d certainly have more incidences of him marrying young children and having sex with them, wouldn’t we? But history suggests that his first wife was at least 15 years older than him, and then he married only one child wife afterwards. Why? If he was a pedophile, who was stopping him from marrying more child girls, in a time when marrying child girls was perfectly OK by the society? So, my conclusion is, he married that child girl not because he was primarily sexually attracted toward her due to his pedophilic urges, but because of something else. True, he had sex with her after marrying her, but it is only reasonable to assume a husband having sex with his wife, child or not.
As I said before, he wasn’t living in modern time USA or Europe, where sexual attractiveness toward children is now called pedophilia and having sex with them is a crime. Back in his time, he only did what was customary, and was seen as a normal behaviour. Even then, he refrained from marrying more than one child, which perhaps shows he was actually discouraging the practice instead of encouraging it.
I think this is a gross over simplification of the truth. We have a little over one billion Muslims in the world, and only a handful of them are found involved in what is seens as spreading Islam through violence and force, and a very tiny tiny few ever choose to marry a child. Even a country like Pakistan do not allow marrying underage girls and boys.
Most Muslims, I think, deeply understand that it is more important to follow today’s laws and customs than to literally follow what happened 1400+ years ago. This is why we rarely see Muslims marrying more than one wife at a time outside of Arab countries. It is more of a Arab practice than a Muslim practice. More of a cultural thing, than a religious thing. Plus, do not underestimate the fact how a lot of Muslim countries allow alcohol and do not force women to wear certain types of dressings.
My point is simple. Muhammad married and had sex with Aisha when marrying young child girls and having sex with them was sanctioned, and even encouraged, by the society. Which means, for a pedophile, who was sexually attracted toward children, there were countless opportunities back then. So, if Muhammad was a pedophile, and thus had sexual attraction toward young children, then it makes no sense that a pedophile like him would marry 11 or so times, only to marry a child just once out of the 11 times! No pedophile would EVER do that. Which means, we can come to the perfectly logical conclusion that he **may** have married Aisha for some entirely different reasons, which we may never know. There is now a big question mark [?] after the word pedophile.
I think, for once, I may have the support of Richard Dawkins and his sidekick PZ Myers on this issue. Never believe in anything without evidence!
This is interesting. Muhammad’s marrying a child girl was right, legal and lawful in the time when he did that. So, if you look at what he did within the context of his culture, customs and society, then he absolutely and positively did nothing wrong. But if you judge his actions within the context of our time, our culture, our laws and customs, then a big YES. Yes, he did something very wrong. But the question is, did he know how societies will evolve in the course of the next 1400 years? I mean, do you know how societies will evolve in the next 200 years? What is legal, moral and ethical now, may become illegal, immoral and unethical in 200 years from now. How would you like people of the future judging us within the context of their culture, and then condemning us for our ‘immoral attitudes’? IS it our fault that we do not know what the future holds for us?
Yes, Muslims have a weak point here, and they can be, and are, criticized heavily for their prophet’s actions. And naturally they react and defend. But, arguing with Muslims and proving them wrong is one thing, and analyzing Islam and Muhammad **objectively** is quite another. And when we do manage to analyze Islam and Muhammad objectively, we may come to MANY surprising conclusions.
For starters, the critics of Islam and Muhammad, especially them ex-Muslims, quite often try to prove to the world how everything that says anything positive about Muhammad is but a lie. Pure fabrication. But, knowingly or unknowingly, the critics can, and do, use the same sources of information to criticse Muhammad and his actions, as if everything about him had suddenly become true. The same people who recorded the historical fact that Muhammad was very kind and loving to children (in a non-pedophilic way), also wrote that Muhammad married a young child girl, Aisha. Now, for the critics of Muhammad, it was a lie that Muhammad was very kind and loving to children, but it is true that he married a child girl because of his sexual attractiveness toward children, because he was pedophile. Does it make ANY sense?
The Muslims here in Kandahar celebrated Eid by launching Katusha rockets at me. I don’t think I like this Eid.
Katusha? Russian missiles. Next army to invade will probably get dumped US ordinance fired at them.
They’re actually made in China based on the Russian design.
Well, the Chinese do have cheap knockoffs down to a fine art.
I wonder if he took the lesson of competing with Jewish (and pagan) holidays from the Christians. They learned to be good at it. But anyone mildly pragmatic would do the same, very likely. (Unlike Christianity in the early days.)
Hi
Tazlima you are nothing=zero.
still you are zero zero zero.
Holding iconoclastic views about religion does not confer upon you the status you are enjoying right now, but because you are cherished as a previliged child/product of the long-drawn out war against Islam by the Rest and the West. I mean that you are beloved of some people not for being anti-religion but anti-Islam.
Feminist!!!
Humanist¡¡¡
Secular!!!
Do you know you are pleading and begging feminism before patriarchy.
I m leaving a suggestion for you that you should take a bold step: Suicide, then you can get what you want as you r the product of this patriarchy.
You are a fool, abso-bloody-lutely, befooled by for your foolishness by the great fools.
You are The Devil. Devil-incarnated.
Mr. waniez open your eyes and look the glowing sun indicate the freedom of humanism, cool your mind and think yourself what is good and what is bad.
…. is there anything more in you than the abusing, waniez ??
Little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Have you understood Taslima?
Kafre
Can you show any historic evidence that marrying a 9 year old child was allowed in the 7th century Arabian society. I couldnt find any evidence in favor of your claim. We have a lot of evidences in ahadith that women in pre-islamic era enjoyed much more independence, even dominance over men in some cases, than they do now in Arabia. In such a social settings, you cant expect people marrying off children of 6-9 years old. The following quote from Sirat Rasulullah shows that Mohammad cast a lusty look at a crawling baby.
“From “The Life of Muhammad” (Sirat Rasul Allah) by Ibn Ishaq:
Suhayli, ii. 79: In the riwaya of Yunus I. I. recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu’lFadl) when she was a baby crawling before him and said, ‘If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.’ But he died before she grew up and Sufyan b. al-Aswad b. ‘Abdu’l-Asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him Rizq and Lubab”
Most of the Ibn ishaq work ‘Sirat Rasulullah was lost, thanks to Ibn Hisham, who edited the Ibn Ishaq Biography to make it over so it doesnt look ugly.
Mohammed was an absolutely illiterate man, and the Koran, in which his sayings are collected, is ninety-nine percent rubbish. You can just open the book anywhere and read it, and you will be convinced of what I am saying. I am not saying on a certain page — anywhere. You just open the book accidentally, read the page and you will be convinced of what I am saying.
Whatsoever one percent truth there is here and there in the Koran is not Mohammed’s. It is just ordinary, ancient wisdom that uneducated people collect easily — more easily than the educated people, because educated people have far better sources of information — books, libraries, universities, scholars. The uneducated, simply by hearing the old people, collect a few words of wisdom here and there. And those words are significant, because for thousands of years they have been tested and found somehow true. So it is the wisdom of the ages that is scattered here and there; otherwise, it is the most ordinary book possible in the world.
Muslims have been asking me, “Why don’t you speak on the Koran? You have spoken on The Bible, on the Gita, this and that.” I could not say to them that it is all rubbish; I simply went on postponing. Even just before I went into silence, a Muslim scholar sent the latest English version of the Koran, praying me to speak on it. But now I have to say that it is all rubbish, that is why I have not spoken on it — because why unnecessarily waste time?
– From Unconciousness to Consciousness
Chapter 5 by Osho
Thanks, I read that too, Osho is my favorite author,I love his book,which every line trigger to my brain.
I love the intolerant and myopic views on a religion which no one except a few among the above commentators have much knowledge about. Its all very well to hold a personal viewpoint on a person who presented basic acts and speeches highly acknowledged and held in much esteem by around one third of the world’s population. Makes sense, doesn’t it? It’s you against 2.4 million people. It’s you, rummaging through the internet, reading and in turn, getting brainwashed by like-minded atheists asserting your irrelevant views, without making a mark, without contributing anything to your (and invariably, the whole world) society, except for sitting with a beer belly on your laptop clicking away and sharing your negative thoughts, possibly emanating a downward spiral in societal success. I understand why you’re so discouraged and unhappy. I feel for you. However, isn’t it injudicious that you throw light upon a figure you’ve barely researched on? I mean, if things really worked out the way you guys think it does, we all could turn into brilliant scientists and doctors, just by reading a couple of books and thoughts.
I don’t think Free speech has anything to do with spreading negativity. Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t it have to do with raising your voice on regard to making a positive change without intentionally hurting another person emotionally?
my advice for you who speaks against belowed prophet Muhammed s.a.w.s. and against islam is to listening to dr. Zakir Naik including you Taslima. read something about islam something that is valid for example: qur’an, hadiths from Bukhari or Muslim and you will know the real truth.
“Religion and Superstition go hand in hand. Religion is Superstition !”
Thanks for such informative article on the eve of Eid !
@khafr
u said that sex with a child wasnt illegal backden,den doesnt it mean dat islam is a religion which is for only rockage.
and i hav read quran, d way dey talk abt,i thought it would be full of miracles. and above all i think there is no true religion. and wat is wrong if u muslim respect others religion.dat will make dem respect yours too.
spreading like rabbits isnt peace.
to khafr
u said that sex with a child wasnt illegal backden,den doesnt it mean dat islam is a religion which is for only rockage.
and i hav read quran, d way dey talk abt,i thought it would be full of miracles. and above all i think there is no true religion. and wat is wrong if u muslim respect others religion.dat will make dem respect yours too.
spreading like rabbits isnt peace.
it may be possible that Mohammed learnt a lot from Jews , but he made such a horrible cage where no space to learn & teach new ideas and thoughts or LIGHT, this cage seems become haven for frustrated and failed people who are insecure by nature , progressive mass of this particular religion fluctuate islamic ideas according to there requirement. but it is only possible if they are economically strong and politically sound.
Now this particular religion become a 3rd world religion , whose objective is just to avail new world .
Tasleem you r a pig daughter understud
waseem, do you have any point except abusing. you guys prove that the food are available with you not worth for eating. At least learn how to be polite and peaceful to draw support.
A religion can called be a Religion only if it has relevance across the times ,across the whole living world… Rules and facilities for some assumed elites can not be named as a religion
Universe is treasured with unsurmountable queries, therefore the answer we seek would be in general and not specific as we r generally told.