Muhammad in Islam

I never said massacring Jews or pagans was okay because Muhammad did it comparatively less often than other rulers, you cretin.

Well I guess, they also believe god revealed his literal and uncreated word to Muhammad which by default makes him the centerpiece of humanity.
The Hadith isn't always followed. Islam has a rating system for the authenticity of Hadith and Sunni and Shia have different Hadith that they accept as authentic, while others reject all Hadith, but Qur'anists are normally hated by both sides.

Thank you, I appreciate taking your time to answer my questions, if I may ask, where'd you learn this from? Because I had a tough time googling answers for stuff like this without several pages of unrelated stuff, even with strong google-fu.

>massacring Jews & pagans
>fairly benevolent
Maybe you should think before you post

Those figures never claimed to be benevolent, though

No, you should probably read about why that happened. Muhammad generally treated conquered people's pretty well compared to other rulers of his.
How is this hard for you to understand? You'd probably spend ages trying to defend Crusaders slaughtering Muslims, yeah?

The study Qur'an has a lot of useful insight into doctrine and jurisprudence as well as references to a lot medieval Islamic scholars, but it is fairly liberal and perrenialist (personally I'd rather every Muslim be that way than the fundamentalist Wahhabi terrorist theology pushed by Saudi Arabia.) I would make that my first purchase.

Otherwise I've been going into a variety of Islamic discussion boards and having conversations with people, or just looking at Wikipedia pages and reading the sources cited in the articles. Be careful though because some mudslimes are mental midgets that will get extremely butthurt about some topics, like Qur'anic uncreation (mainly Sunni's) or implying that Muhammad /may/ have misunderstood the Trinity

Also for reading Hadith there is hadithcollection and sunnah.com

Get ready for some laughs though honestly because some of the Hadith are ridiculous

I'm aware of the apologists' version of Muhammads life & I see no reason to believe it. I imagine you think the reason he sucked infants tongues was to save them from dying of thirst lol

m8 he might have been an okay dude for his time, but that still makes him an arsehole today.

Which makes his worship as a religious paragon problematic.

No, I just find it funny how LARPers will act like Muhammad was uniquely evil.

Oh definitely, Muhammad is a shit example of what the greatest man to ever live should be.

The reason for killing jews and pagans was that they broke the treaty, and attacked the medina which was vulnerable at the time. Let's say it was Julius Caesar in his place, so ceaser would have also killed the jews and pagans to make a point. But you wouldn't call Caeser a tyrant, would you?

Nobody is even implying he was uniquely evil. The issue with Mohammad, and the reason why great effort has been made to highlight his improprieties, is that 1.5 billion people believe him to be the perfect human & the perfect role model.

>God kills billions
>God is benevolent
Christcuck logic

Actually i would, but i refer you to

>He's the final prophet
the quran actually doesn't say this. It's a tradition that became orthodoxy a few centuries after mohammed.

I'm an agnostic, try again.

Isn't Caesar hero and role model for western People, Even though he genocided gauls?

>Agnostic fag
Didn't know i was arguing with a literal retard this whole time.

not really
fight me

>Not really
Are you retarded by any chance

Neither were they as good as Muhammed though.
There is a reason arabs conquered the levant so easily and it was because te old rulers were dicks to the local peoples basically.

he is not very often mentioned in the Quran. It mentiones Moses or Jesus for example more often.

Quran 33:44

Why do non-muslims see ibn ishaq as a credible source? Every evil thing is mentioned there, but at the same time all scholars reject it

>Their greeting the Day they meet Him will be, "Peace." And He has prepared for them a noble reward.

?

Sorry my mistake 33:40

I could have sworn it was because the Romans and Persians had been at war for three decades before being hit by a huge plague.

>Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah , of all things, Knowing.

So it does say that he is the last, but it doesn't say that he is the perfect human and should be imitated.

Well, no where does it say that he was the perfect human, in Islam no body is perfect, in the Quran, God in disagrees with some of Muhammads actions and guides him for better ones (eg: a whole surah for the blind man who came to the prophet) ,Muhammad does mistake and Quran emphasizes on that, always says that he is human like you (us) only difference is that it was revealed to him that God is one. However Muhammad doesnt sin. Believers should imitate his modesty, humblness, his mercy, his way of treating people, his way of treating his wives, imitate how he worshiped God day and night... ect..ect . You can read alot about that if you are intrested.

The majority of humanity is evil.

Sounds like some political leader made up the hadith to make his subjects obedient to him desu.

The quran isn't mostly filled with his stories though....

Hadith is a vast science , but I cant disagree with you , It was used often for personal agendas and to control the masses , many caliphates did that , and you can look at gulf contries kings today. And even isis

The Qur'an ismisrly just god talking to Muhammad, I guess that counts?

The Quran barely says anything about Muhammad, and there are more stories about Jesus and Noah than him. Muhammad became more important over time as each new generation of early Muslims began to reach further and further back to Muhammad's companions and Muhammad himself to justify their legal and moral opinions on law and governance. He was the trump card that allowed the rising religious clerical class to usurp the authority of the caliphs, who themselves had been reach back to the precedents of other caliphs. The four Rightly Guided Caliphs are a compromise from that endeavor ranked just below Muhammad in authority.

>It's a retarded meme pushed by Deus vult LARPers that Muhammad was somehow worse than the rulers around him.

AG 945, indiction VII: On Friday, 4 February, [i.e., 634 CE / Dhul Qa‘dah 12 AH] at the ninth hour, there was a battle between the Romans and the Arabs of Mụhammad [Syr. tayyāyē d-Ṃhmt] in Palestine twelve miles east of Gaza. The Romans fled, leaving behind the patrician YRDN (Syr. BRYRDN), whom the Arabs killed. Some 4000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there, Christians, Jews and Samaritans. The Arabs ravaged the whole region.

AG 947, indiction IX: The Arabs invaded the whole of Syria and went down to Persia and conquered it; the Arabs climbed mountain of Mardin and killed many monks there in [the monasteries of] Kedar and Benōthō. There died the blessed man Simon, doorkeeper of Qedar, brother of Thomas the priest.

Such peaceful.

He's right though. At that point Muhammad was dead, and Abu Bakr (or any number of rival pretenders) were in charge.

implying that Muhammad /may/ have misunderstood the Trinity

>Quran affirms both the Quran and the Gospels as authoritative, eternal, uncorruptable word of God
>gospels say anyone who denys the Father and Son is of the anti-christ

Muhammed attacks and kills caravan traders, the lifeblood of non-coastal cities
Mecca retaliated by sending troops to guard the caravans
Muhammed attacks them, killing them

>They attacked first

>However Muhammad doesnt sin
Nice historical revisionism to make Muhammed more like Jesus.
>modesty, treating people
Literally married his adopted sons wife, then outlawed adoption
>Mercy
The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allah "; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah ." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded? 9:30
>His wives
From Aisha, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!"

Its easy to worship a God you created to justify your beliefs

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled. 9:29

Note that this isnt defensive. It doesn't say, fight those who fight you. Its fight those who don't believe the same as you.

>Note that this isnt defensive. It doesn't say, fight those who fight you. Its fight those who don't believe the same as you.

How does this say that 'Muhammad was somehow worse than the rulers around him' as the other user was talking about?

Seeing as how Mohammad thought the trinity was Father, Son and Mary, yeah, he misunderstood the trinity.

Seeing as how he thought the trinity was three gods, yeah, he misunderstood the trinity.

Almost like the devil himself was whispering in his ear for 20 years.

But the devil wouldn't lie about his name......would he?

Islam allows only 4 wives. Muhammad had 11. Is he exempt from the rules of his own religion or what?

>Note that this isnt defensive. It doesn't say, fight those who fight you. Its fight those who don't believe the same as you.

The verses before this, and the whole chapter, are talking of an already ongoing war with several battles having taken place.

As his 6 year old wife pointed out, allah sure was quick with the new revelations right when Mohammad needed them.

You failed to put one good argument. I dont even have to answer you.

>Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled. 9:29

muzzies at the time was at war with another tribe and mo' had previously told muzzies to not be the aggressors. now that they had to defend themselves, this verse was revealed to him, making it allowed for muzzies to strike back

That was the battle of Tabuk with the roman empire

Dont talk of things you dont know, the Quran talks about different sects of Christianity at the time. Who say Jesus is the son of God, Who say jesus is God and who say there are three Gods (God,Jesus,Marry), the last sect went away in the 7th and 8th century(they even had troubles with other christians)

The quran talks nothing true about Christianity at all.

Jesus is God, was crucified and died on a cross, and rose from the dead.

Not Jesus is not God, was not crucified but allah tricked everyone, and did not rise from the dead.

Almost as though the devil himself was whispering into Mohammad's ear for 20 years.

If you're denying the quran says "say not three", then go ahead and be an apostate. Tell your former muslim buddies you no longer believe the quran is the eternal word of allah.

If you fail to understand what the Quran is saying, thats not my problem.
Devil whispering in his ear telling him that God is one, Nothing like him, Greater than all, telling him to act justly, leave falsehood, do not lie nor betray, be good to everyone, feed the poor and take care of the orphan, give charity , be good to prisoneres, forgive who hurt you, do not agress and be kind? , yeah sure does sound like the Devil to me

Mohamed brought Islam to humanity. He is the central figure of Islam. He declared himself "the last prophet" that the One True God will ever send to save humanity. He's a role model for what a Muslim should aspire to become. He was sinless. He was pure. He carried on the message that god ordered him to deliver despite fierce and often harmful resistance. He performed miracles that made the unbelievers forsake their idols and declare Allah as their god. He spread Islam.

See why he's important yet?

> Guess we better start condemning almost every important figure in history
I don't revere historical figures as prophets of God who's behavior I ought to emulate to the tee

Battles which he started. Historically it is known that he was planning on attacking the Eastern Roman Empire. A people who had done nothing against him.
Read what I said literally the next line. It doesnt say fight those who attack you. Its fight those who don't believe as you do

>He performed miracles
Literally no proof at all for this. There is no contempory proof for Muhammed doing anything other than waging unjust war on other people.
>He was sinless. He was pure
See above

>He's a role model for what a Muslim should aspire to become
Rape, murder and pillage across the middle east, into Europe, into asia. ISIS is the embodiment of Muhammeds teachings

Not him but ISIS? Read a book dude...

Your ignorance baffles me.
1.Muhammad had sent his emissary to the ruler of Bosra.While on his way to Bosra, he was executed in the village of Mu'tah by the orders of a Ghassanid official.
They crucified the head of Ma'an because he became a muslim.
They Gathered a huge army to wipe out medina at Tabuk.(in which the verse you put was revealed). They killed and threatend to kill any convert.
Every enemy he battled against said he was merciful, the opression he withstanded from meccan polythiests was unbarable and yet he told them go you are free. He is the only one who came with huge reformative system to end slavery. He didnt have any slaved and freed alone 63 slaves. His household freed 33 thousand !! In hunayn he tried to free em all , almost a fight broke lose because he did that. The verse you put says fight not kill, it is explained in the light of other verses:
Quran 2:190
Quran 60:8
Quran 16:125
22:39
And many more , the verse says to fight until they give jizya not until they convert. Meaning who fights you, you fight back and the only way to stop fighting is until they pay jizya

Read books you fuck

haha I hope you aren't serious. He was anti-slavery? Look for the sake of argument lets say the tripe you posted before is true, which for the record it isn't. But he was anti-slavery?

Quran (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee"
Quran (24:32) - "And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves..."
Quran (16:75) - "Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means;) praise be to Allah.'

Sahih Bukhari (80:753) - "The Prophet said, 'The freed slave belongs to the people who have freed him.'"
Sahih Bukhari (41.598) - Slaves are property. They cannot be freed if an owner has outstanding debt, but they can be used to pay off the debt.
Sahih Bukhari (34:351) - Muhammad sells a slave for money. He was thus a slave trader.
Sahih Muslim 4112 - A man freed six slaves on the event of his death, but Muhammad reversed the emancipation and kept four in slavery to himself. He cast lots to determine which two to free.

Read what I said, ISIS does what Muhammed teaches

Read your own

agreed, but he did considerably roll back the rights of women compared to pre islamic arabia, and banned marriages of multiple men to one or multiple women which were common among some arab tribes.

That was definitely a step in the wrong direction, and even more damning when you consider that he was only able to live the life of a poet and write the Koran because he was supported by his first wife who owned a caravan. Under Islamic law that wouldn't have been possible.

So you took a bunch of hadiths written hundreds of years after the prophet to force them down my throat, and left what the Quran says about the matter, for your information , marrying a slave makes him free, you ignored all authentic things I put forward and threw weak hadiths. You ignore hundreds of hadiths regarding slavery , you ignored tens of verses regarding the subject , if you have a shred of curiosity to truth you would study the subject, then drop conclusions, all you did is copy things from anti islamic sites. I am sorry but I dont debate people like you, I am sure that you are a bigoted christian that didnt have a proper research in his life.

Women had no rights in pre islamic arabia. The traditions of marriages before Islam were disgusting (sharing wives, treating them like slaves,no rights what so ever,no inheritance) they were burrying young girls. After Islam wimen had a huge role, where did you get your info from?

Me: Your argument is stupid and here are reasons directly contradicting your argument
You: Your argument is stupid and you're and idiot

What I'm gathering from this is that you cannot argue so you resort to calling me uneducated and attempting to take the moral high ground. Good job, I honestly hope you can sleep well at night

My dude...learn a bit about ISIS before comparing them to the Prophet and his followers.

>Almost as though the devil himself was whispering into Mohammad's ear for 20 years
Why are protestants so superstitious

Do you imagine slavery during the Islamic period as being similar to the slavery of blacks in the US? If so, you're way off. Also Bilal is a good example of a man completely freed by Muhammad.

>Quran tells muslims to pray
>Hadiths tells muslims how to pray
Hadiths are sources about things muhammed said/did and his surroundings etc.
Some sources are less reliable so you have a whole study/discussion around these hadiths.

I can sleep very well at night knowing who my prophet was.
Well I dont argue with someone who cant read a couple wikipedia articles.
When you have a wide view about the subject I would be more than happy to argue about the small bits.

quora com/How-does-Islam-treat-slavery
youtu(dot)be/Gem7d7CRifc

>Muhammad was fairly benevolent
Dropped

Sadly it kinda does, and we all know that with a little exegesis you can make pretty much any verse of any sacred text mean whatever you want it to mean. In this particular case, the jump wasn't actually that hard to do.

benevolent by warlord standards

>sahih bukhari and sahih muslim are weak hadiths
Literally the most authenticated hadiths with the strongest chains of narration

Don't make me use the taqiyya meme, lad

I am talking about the specific hadiths he threw , bith have more than 10 thousand hadiths, Muslim have more weak hadiths than bukhari, even if bukharis hadiths regarded as sahih(Authentic) doesnt mean they are true, only means they have a chance, If they condridict alot more other hadiths they are dropped, and espicially if they condridict Quran. Only conservative sunnis have blind faith of all of bukhari and rank it near the Quran. Researches have been done to clean bukhari from false hadiths, around 100 to 200 hadiths found as wrong from their matn(core) and sanad(chain of narration), hadiths this guy throwing range from weak(hadith muslim) to marfo'(suspended) to ghareeb(strange sanad) to condridicting matn(core,text it self), not to mention some people fabricating hadiths for their own agendas.

Abu Bakr and Umar mad a bunch of Hadith up after Muhammad died. This way they could consolidate power.

Sure thing Haidar. If you said some ummayad caliphs I would agree.

Not trying to be a dick but sounds a bit like cherrypicking on your side. Out of those 10,000s of hadiths, he just happened to only pick the low tier and suspended kind? Then you go on a tangent about conservative sunnis. And then you also kinda ignored the qur'an quotes about slavery, brushing them off by saying "marriage freed the slaves". You do realise "freeing slaves" by force-marrying them is just as much barbaric, right? It's not like they can say no before you put a ring on it.

Ultimately you orthodox muslims are gonna have to realise Mohammad is never going to be appreciated by christian cultured nations, even if most are secular or extremely liberal christians. I'm not saying that to be offensive, and I know Mohammad was fairly "peaceful" throughout the meccan period (not like he had a choice anyway) but once he became a statesman during throughout the medinan surahs, his character does change.

Ultimately when a christian-cultured person looks at the life of Jesus (an unsuccessful insurgent who never killed anyone, whether for "right" reasons or not) and then you put him next to somebody who did do those things - and ask them to make a moral choice as to which one is most aligned with benevolence or pacifism, then it is pretty clear which one they are going to pick.

It's just a cultural impasse, I'm afraid.

>Shi'ite detected
Kys fag

>how does that tie into islam in general?

Some hadiths are considered more or less reliable than others based on the chain of transmission prior to the writing of the specific hadith.

>But you wouldn't call Caeser a tyrant, would you?

Ummmm

>Isn't Caesar hero and role model for western People

Nigger, most people in the West you would ask on the street might generally know who Caesar was, but they couldn't tell you anything other than that his namesake salad is pretty fucking tasty. And he sure as fuck isn't some venerated folk hero.

Just as I would expect the average person on the street in Lebanon couldn't tell you anything about Hassan-i Sabbah or Rashid ad-Din Sinan.

>18th and early 19th century dictator with imperial ambitions using imagery of historical empire

Really activates your almonds...

Well, not my problem if most of the hadiths people pick are false, and its not me saying they are false, I am taking terms used by all muslim scholars, I am not basing my opinion on cherry picking, he is, I base my answers on real scholar researches even between conservatives them self. I base my view of Muhammad on the amount hadiths going to each direction, in case of slavery you might find 10 hadiths max to support that Muhammad was into slavery, but I can give you hundreds that was anti slavery and hundreds of examples of his companions and first caliphs, the most authentic source is the Quran and in it we can clearly see that it is anti slavery. No body said anything about forced marriage. It says when you marry with choice. Even if you hit your slave he is instantly freed, read about Mokataba where a master is obligated to write an agreement with slave to free him, people have the misconception between slavery in islam and other caltures say the US 150 years ago,(actually in islam it is not allowed to say slaves but girls boys and raqeeq(sof,weak people) I cant cover the whole subject but I urge you to read. Secondly the difference between Muhammad and jesus is that jesus was in a period of peace and Muhammad was in a period and place of tribal disputes wars and trouble. Everyone wanted to kill him and his new religion, he made a nation(ummah) of belivers like modern country with rules of co existence, constitution and jurisprudence, and military. He never fought who didnt fight hum first, he always seeked peace treaties, those are not my words those are words of westreners and words of people like Carine Armstrong. He doesnt change during medinan period its just that people got agressive towards him during that time. And the thing is Jesus and Muhammad are two examples people should follow in Islam so all prophets, no body denies that.

>jesus was in a period of peace
I would hardly call the roman occupation of judea a peaceful time, temples were sacked and burnt, there was sectarian violence between various branches of judaism, herod literally tried to kill as many children as possible that matched his description from the moment of his birth, he was forced to flee cities numerous times, and he was eventually backstabbed by corrupted peers and crucified even though the local consul knew he was innocent. And things only got worse after his death anyway, barely 30 years later war broke out and the main jerusalem temple was completely destroyed.

You really wanna compare that with tribal tensions half in the middle of the desert?

And despite all of that he still did not opt for violence (at the very least not physical violence - since we know he threw a tantrum in the market temple that ONE time). You know if someone if going to ask themselves "how would a benevolent god or prophet of said god would behave", not being a killer would probably be requirement number one. Not so much for mohammad and his "merciful" allah. Jesus embraced death to save us all, or so he believed. I don't see the same redemption character in Mo'.

And even if Mo' somehow had it worse in his timeline, since when divine benevolence, omniscience and mercy is RELATIVE to time period? Thank god the prophets didn't show up in 40000BC because they probably would have caved the skulls of half the tribe while playing fire wars.

>No body said anything about forced marriage. It says when you marry with choice.
Yeah yeah whatever. You offer a slave either a life working your field or a life in your bed, that's totally not entrapment. It was her (((choice))) afterall. Get real mate.

>I cant cover the whole subject but I urge you to read
I actually did read the qur'an, dawood edition a few years ago. Don't expect me to read the rest of the sunnah though. Messy chapter order. But nothing enlightening. Big surprise.

>But you wouldn't call Caeser a tyrant, would you?

I would

>But you wouldn't call Caeser a tyrant, would you?
Seizing power without getting elected or being of royal blood is LITERALLY the definition of a tyrant. Doesn't matter whether you like the dude or not.

Why are mudslimes so proficient at double thinking? Is there something about the adhan that kills braincells?

>or being of royal blood
What?

A tyrannos is someone who seizes power without either being elected archon or having aristoi claim to power. Usually ambitious men taking advantage of periods of anarchia.

That's what the ancient greek term meant in the days of periander, pisistratos and gelo. Read a book sometimes and go beyond the wikipill.

It was still a period of relative peace compared to what Muhammad and his followers went through , they even tried to dig his mother grave for Gods sake.
How does you reading the Quran qualifies you to be expert on the subject exactly, you arrogant prick. You know what, you are so fuckin hopeless, As the Quran says, I have my religion and you have yours.
Slaves working in the field? Hahaha best meme ever, you dont even know what slavery was, how are you on Veeky Forums again?

That equivocation is cringeworthy. He obviously didn't mean "tyrant" in the Ancient Greek sense.

>urges me to read his shit
>respond that I already have read some but it wasn't really up to my taste
>YOU ARROGANT PRICK SO FECKIN HOPELESS

>how are you on Veeky Forums again?
It's not like we have any barrier of entry you arrogant cunt

>Slaves working in the field? Hahaha best meme ever, you dont even know what slavery was
This triggers the mudslime

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade

>The Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs recruited many Zanj slaves as soldiers and, as early as 696, there were slave revolts of the Zanj against their Arab enslavers in Iraq (see Zanj Rebellion).
>The Zanj who were taken as slaves to the Middle East were often used in strenuous agricultural work. As the plantation economy boomed and the Arabs became richer, agriculture and other manual labor work was thought to be demeaning. The resulting labor shortage led to an increased slave market

Yeah. Frankly I think he'd be somewhat concerned about ISIS. It's one thing to kill enemies who have betrayed you, Mohammad is surely fine with that. Killing journalists and aid workers who are guests in your land by torturing them to death? Seems incompatible with ancient values of hospitality.