Could have Islam exist without Judaism & Christianity?

[garrydons]

No. Islam could not exist without Judaism and even Christianity. Both Islam and Christianity came from Judaism. If we will study the origin of Islam and Christianity, we will know these facts.

 

[ankarali]

Much of Islam are based on 2 different religions: Judaism and Christianity.

So could Islam exist without Judaism and Christianity?

The scriptures that narrated the lives of Adam to Noah, to Abraham, to Moses, and to the kings, the survivors of the Exile in Babylon to the construction of the Second Temple (in the Tanakh) and the lives of Jesus and Paul.

So without Abraham and Ishmael, there would be no Muhammad.

Mohammad (pubh) was a man who does not know reading and writing

Imagine a man by not knowing reading and writing how he can write the ''Qoran''

 

[kai]

Mohammad (pubh) was a man who does not know reading and writing

Imagine a man by not knowing reading and writing how he can write the ''Qoran''

But he didnt write it? you do know that?

 

[Caladan]

But he didnt write it? you do know that?

I doubt that a successful merchant from the most economically strong tribe in the Hejaz did not know read or write. He must have had to manage and read lists and other documents. Not being able to read and write seems to be more of a tradition to validate the Qur'an.

 

[Caladan]

Muslims also never claimed that the Quran is something new, but its a book that has fixed the errors of the past scriptures and nothing else.

How does the Qur'an accomplish that? I understand that there are a few basic differences between the three monotheistic tradtions and that the Qur'an may reflect it. For example an obvious one is treating Jesus as a prophet, rather than a God incarnate, big difference from Christianity. But if one reads the Hebrew Bible, you can clearly see that the Biblical elements which are brought up in the Qur'an are not as elaborative as they are in their original form, furthermore the Qur'an doesn't even go into most of the Bible but instead focuses on bringing Muhammad's message to the tribes of the Hejaz. Not much is said about Hebrew prophetic writings, about the Biblical history and chronology of the People of Israel or Biblical wisdom writing, prose, literature, or poetry. In this case, the Qur'an doesn't elaborate at all about the Hebrew Bible, but instead tries to establish Abrahamic monotheism in the Hejaz. Remember that his main efforts were focused on breaking older Arab practices of polytheism and make a simple and acceptable new monotheistic system, with new moral justice, much of it is also derived from Judaism.

 

[kai]

I doubt that a successful merchant from the most economically strong tribe in the Hejaz did not know read or write. He must have had to manage and read lists and other documents. Not being able to read and write seems to be more of a tradition to validate the Qur'an.

Could well be , I am puzzled why the ability of the prophet to read and write has any bearing on its validity to Muslims.

Of course the answer could be they know very little about the history of the Quran.

 

[gnostic]

Mohammad (pubh) was a man who does not know reading and writing

Imagine a man by not knowing reading and writing how he can write the ''Qoran''

That doesn't mean much.

In Christianity, many people didn't read too, nor have the money to purchase a copy of the books or scrolls. So in church, the priests would preach, retelling what Jesus or Paul say. Or they would narrate what happened in Genesis or Exodus or Psalms.

As for the Jews, there would often be someone there who could read to the audience, from scrolls in synagogues.

Muhammad had life of merchant, first from uncle, and then married to a wealthy widow. So he was bound to encounter Jews or Christians.

Among the Druids and bards in the British Isles and Gaul, they didn't write as well. Knowledge and stories were passed from generation to generation, hence oral tradition. The trick of memorizing come from verses.

The Iliad and The Odyssey were originally composed by bards, too, centuries of master passing the epic poetry to the apprentice bards, before these were eventually written down, supposedly by man named Homer. The epic of Gilgamesh was the same, centuries of oral tradition 1st and before the poem was written down. All 3 of these works were written, because it was easy to remember in poetry forms than in prose.

The Qur'an as written in Arabic, were written in verse, instead of prose.

So forgive me, if I don't take your claim of Muhammad knowing nothing of Jewish or Christian teachings. I dislike dishonesty from religious people. And if you're not dishonest, then you're naive (or worse, indoctrinated).

 

[Bismillah]

That certainly looked good on paper, but it didn't work out too well for the Jews.

Of course it didn't they were the elite and once the Arabs unified under Islam their power structure waned and as such they fought it and the Muslims fought back and won.

 

[Caladan]

Of course it didn't they were the elite and once the Arabs unified under Islam their power structure waned and as such they fought it and the Muslims fought back and won.

You are diverting from a bigger and clearer picture here. First, the Jews of the Hejaz were largely of Arab ethnicity. Second, the major conflict was between the movement of Muhammad and the Arab tribes who sided with the Quraysh. More than anything it seems that the Jews were cought in a civil war between Pagan henotheistic Arabs, and Muhammad's followers.

 

[Bismillah]

I doubt that a successful merchant from the most economically strong tribe in the Hejaz did not know read or write. He must have had to manage and read lists and other documents. Not being able to read and write seems to be more of a tradition to validate the Qur'an.

The merchant from the most economically strong Hijaz sounds well and good before one realizes that the Hijaz was a backwater and that Meccan society was heavily illiterate.

Remember that his main efforts were focused on breaking older Arab practices of polytheism

Hardly, the goals of Islam from the beginning were much more ambitious and were fulfilled to create a global religion not an Arab one.

and make a simple and acceptable new monotheistic system, with new moral justice, much of it is also derived from Judaism.

This is, by the way, a highly arrogant and insulting insinuation.

The Qur'an as written in Arabic, were written in verse, instead of prose.

No that is not true and you should shy away from making such definative statements on the Qur'an if you are unfamiliar with it. Taha Husayn, [10] a prominent Egyptian Litterateur, during the course of a public lecture summarised
how the Qur’an achieves this unique form:

“But you know that the Qur’an is not prose and that it is not verse either. It is rather Qur’an, and it cannot be called by any other name but this. It is not verse, and that is clear; for it does not bind itself to the bonds of verse. And it is not prose, for it is bound by bonds peculiar to itself, not found elsewhere; some of the binds are related to the endings of its verses and some to that musical sound which is all its own. It is therefore neither verse nor prose, but it is “a Book whose verses have been perfected the expounded, from One Who is Wise, All-Aware.”

An in depth study here

Secondly the Prophet himself was not a poet, he never composed any, nor was he known for this skill unlike his cousin Ibn Sufyan.

Thirdly you have no basis calling him dishonest, naive, or indoctrinated when all that he has said is supported by the historical record. In fact just from this conversation I have more basis to throw these assertions at you.

 

[Bismillah]

You are wrong on several accounts here. First, the Jews of the Hejaz were largely of Arab ethnicity

While at the same time maintaining the Jewish culture and having a separate form of religion, interestingly on other threads this would fall under your own definition of different people.

Second, the major conflict was between the movement of Muhammad and the Arab tribes who sided with the Quraysh.

Never did I bring up a "major conflict" I said the Jews were threatened, they were, fought against Islam's emergence, they did, and lost, which they did.

It is instructive, for example, to look at Medina which was composed of two Arab tribes Banu Aws and Banu Kharaj and supplied by differing Jewish tribes of Medina. With the unification of the earlier two tribes, once sworn enemies, under Islam the influx of wealth generated by the past conflict as well as the nature of relation between Arab client states and Jewish supplier states was threatened.

 

[Caladan]

The merchant from the most economically strong Hijaz sounds well and good before one realizes that the Hijaz was a backwater and that Meccan society was heavily illiterate.

Most people may have been illiterate. But not all of them, Mecca was an urban society, and the Quraysh the most economically and politically strong tribe, within that tribe Muhammad was considered a very successful merchant, he traveled between the Indian ocean and the Levant dealing with goods, people, caravans. In order to maintain such an enterprise one has to have lists ready and some basic documents.

Hardly, the goals of Islam from the beginning were much more ambitious and were fulfilled to create a global religion not an Arab one.

Sources please

This is, by the way, a highly arrogant and insulting insinuation.

Yes, I realize that every historical argument which doesn't involve saying that all prophets and God's messanges were Muslim, and that every thing the Qur'an says is fact is offensive to Muslims.
This seems to be the basic theme of debates about Islam. Most members look for the academic and historical inquisitive approach, while the Muslims expect us to take things at face value with no research and on good faith.

 

[Caladan]

While at the same time maintaining the Jewish culture and having a separate form of religion, interestingly on other threads this would fall under your own definition of different people.

Stick to this thread, instead of bringing assumptions here. Your assumptions were wrong in the other thread as well.

Never did I bring up a "major conflict" I said the Jews were threatened, they were, fought against Islam's emergence, they did, and lost, which they did.

No, but a member who hasn't read up on the background for the conflict between Muhammad and the Quraysh, and between the alliance in Medina and the alliance of Mecca is going to be mislead by what you wrote.

 

[Bismillah]

Most people may have been illiterate. But not all of them, Mecca was an urban society, and the Quraysh the most economically and politically strong tribe, within that tribe Muhammad was considered a very successful merchant, he traveled between the Indian ocean and the Levant dealing with goods, people, caravans.

There were two great expeditions to Syria, yes. He didn't travel alone.

In order to maintain such an enterprise one has to have lists ready and some basic documents.

Interesting qualifier, don't know how you are one to make such a demand. Regardless I'll side with the historical record.
[/quote]

Sources please

The Qur'an itself addresses the readers as mankind and numerous times places an emphsis on religion as opposed to specific ethnicity. The intended audenience has always been a global one

Thus We have appointed you a middle nation, that you may be witnesses upon mankind." (Quran, surah 11:43)

The hadith only further this point.

Yes, I realize that every historical argument which doesn't involve saying that all prophets and God's messanges were Muslim, and that every thing the Qur'an says is fact is offensive to Muslims.

Please calling Islam a simple religion heavily borrowing from Judaism is insulting, you trying to divert the matter doesn't change that. Islam bought a new Shari'ah and approach to Allah and while the characters may have been the same the views and emphasis was highly different. So yes while sister religions have similarity they are not identical, nor did I ever bring up this point. I was more concerned with the idea that your intellectual position allows you to speak definitively for, apparently, a simple religion confined to backwater Arab towns.

 

[Bismillah]

No, but a member who hasn't read up on the background for the conflict between Muhammad and the Quraysh, and between the alliance in Medina and the alliance of Mecca is going to be mislead by what you wrote.

What the hell are you talking about because I am mislead by you.

I said "Of course it didn't they were the elite and once the Arabs unified under Islam their power structure waned and as such they fought it and the Muslims fought back and won." and you accused me of diverting? Do you understand I was directing this to Ymir who was talking specifically about the Jewish tribes?

It was you who moved the goalposts and said that the Jews weren't the major conflict (?) when I didn't discuss any such thing in the first place. Furthermore even if I did, you are wrong. The Jewish tribes were not bystanders between the two sides of Muslims and Quraysh, they actively took sides that is apparent.

 

[Caladan]

There were two great expeditions to Syria, yes. He didn't travel alone. Interesting qualifier, don't know how you are one to make such a demand. Regardless I'll side with the historical record.

Cite your historical records that Muhammad was illiterate. Furthermore there was no one single edition of the Qur'an until Uthman the third Caliph ordered it.

The Qur'an itself addresses the readers as mankind and numerous times places an emphsis on religion as opposed to specific ethnicity. The intended audenience has always been a global one

Thus We have appointed you a middle nation, that you may be witnesses upon mankind." (Quran, surah 11:43)

The hadith only further this point.

The Qur'an is hardly a source about this issue. The historical research shows us clearly that Muhamad aim was to break the econmoic hold the Quraysh had over the Kaaba, and in order to do that he went after their Gods, furthermore one of his methods in breaking this grip was offering alternatives to the religious importance of the Kaabah. The expansion of Islam outside the region only began after the death of Muhammad, and still even then there was great importance placed on the Arab ethnicity of people, in this case you could find important people who happened to be Christian but operated in an Arab system.

Please calling Islam a simple religion heavily borrowing from Judaism is insulting, you trying to divert the matter doesn't change that. Islam bought a new Shari'ah and approach to Allah and while the characters may have been the same the views and emphasis was highly different. So yes while sister religions have similarity they are not identical, nor did I ever bring up this point. I was more concerned with the idea that your intellectual position allows you to speak definitively for, apparently, a simple religion confined to backwater Arab towns.

You are completely over reaching. Understanding comparative religion is an essential part of historical debates. No one is saying that Islam is identical to other religions, but much of what historians of these period do is understanding the interaction in the Hejaz and in the region, and they understand the diffusion and influence of Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism on Muhammad's movement and over the Arab tribes in Pre Islamic times in general. As a case study to this, one has to look at the early cultures which adopted Islam, even they still held firmly to cultural traditions which are not rooted in Islam. I personally find it to be a fascinating period and developments, Muhammad did promote several social improvements for example in marriage, which historically clearly arrive from Judaism.

 

[Caladan]

What the hell are you talking about because I am mislead by you.

Not me. I am basically pointing out that the Jews were cought in a greater historical episode in the region, so that people who go through this thread will not get the assumption that there was some cosmic war between the Jews and Muhammad's movement, in fact the war was between those who sided with Muhammad and those who sided with the Quraysh.
But lets clear the air about it. OK so it's not what you meant to say, I accept that. I also completely accept the fact the Jewish tribes had to, yes HAD to make decisions and take sides on several occasions. Again what I am pointing out to the readers is that the main war was not between the Jews and Muhammad but between Muhammad and the Quraysh. And just like the Jewish tribes may have take decisions which were not in support of Muhammad, surprisingly many in the Hunufa despite their Abrahamic monotheism also sided with the Quraysh in the end because of this tribes role over the Kaabah.

 

[Tyler Durne]

Much of Islam are based on 2 different religions: Judaism and Christianity.

So could Islam exist without Judaism and Christianity?

The scriptures that narrated the lives of Adam to Noah, to Abraham, to Moses, and to the kings, the survivors of the Exile in Babylon to the construction of the Second Temple (in the Tanakh) and the lives of Jesus and Paul.

So without Abraham and Ishmael, there would be no Muhammad.

Islam would not even exist if not for Judaism. Muhammad learned with Jews at some point he came to a conclusion that he wants to be the next prophet of the Jews but once he was rebuked for it by Jews he turned against them and started focusing on the Arab tribes. That is the reason why Quran at first speaks well of the Jews and by the end of the book it expresses violence towards them.

all the claims in this thread that Islam could have existed without Judaism is non-sense. People of Muslim faith are jut refusing to admit that because of the current world events and the rising hate for Jews in the Muslim world, which is by the way is being spread by Muslim scholars. If they validate Judaism then they can't spread hate for Israel and the rest is self explanatory.

 

[loverOfTruth]

Islam would not even exist if not for Judaism. Muhammad learned with Jews at some point he came to a conclusion that he wants to be the next prophet of the Jews but once he was rebuked for it by Jews he turned against them and started focusing on the Arab tribes. That is the reason why Quran at first speaks well of the Jews and by the end of the book it expresses violence towards them.

all the claims in this thread that Islam could have existed without Judaism is non-sense. People of Muslim faith are jut refusing to admit that because of the current world events and the rising hate for Jews in the Muslim world, which is by the way is being spread by Muslim scholars. If they validate Judaism then they can't spread hate for Israel and the rest is self explanatory.

Nice propaganda material :cover:

And the red part above is a joke. Just read Surah 2 and 3.

Actually, the argument 'Islam couldn't exist without Judaism' is based upon a logical fallacy "Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because of this," that states, "Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one."

[From : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc]

 

[Caladan]

I think after the last 3,4 pages worth of exchange we need to review some things.

First lets try to clear the air.

When one looks into an historical period, one also studies the interaction between the existing people, diffusion of philosophies, and other aspects of the comparative nature. There is nothing wrong with it, if the Muslim members who take offence so quickly from this thread look into other threads they will see how many of us discuss the development of Israelite monotheism in pretty much the same way, in fact it will be a while until we can even use the term Judaism which emerged after great changes in the Levant.
Also, I think its important from the non Muslim side to say, that if not for the repeated non historical claims that Biblical kings such as David or Solomon, that all the Prophets of Israel, and that other Biblical figures are 'Muslim', in addition to a variety of other non historical claims, most of the members here wouldn't have the inclination and motivation to be so decisive in this argument. I think Muslim members need to look into the fact that many of them make claims that none of us can accept while meeting our own standards of honesty.

Now let me cut to the chase. Here is a short summery of my prespective on the matter.

The Hejaz or the Western side of the Arabian peninsula during the 6th century was a brewing place of several roots and traditions. The Christian Byzantine Empire was to the west, and the Zoroastrian Sassanide Empire was to the east. Inside the Hejaz itself the Arabs practiced a form of Pagan henotheism, where they have turned to many gods, but still a god called Allah resided above this complex pantheon, the people only rarely turned to this supreme god in their matters and that is because there were lesser deities they turned to. Allah was pretty much uncreachable. This is one of the changes Muhammad made, like in other Abrahamic religions Muhammad made the contat with Allah direct. More importantly Muhammad sought to abolish the entire Arabic pantheon of Pagan gods and to establish a monotheism which is based on the worship of Allah as the sole deity.

An interesting phenomenon in the region was that there were already people before Muhammad neither Jewish nor Christian who attempted to practice Abrahamic monotheism, these were called the Hanifs, or Hunufa. In fact several Islamic traditions tell us that Muhammad was inspired by several such men. As a whole, the people of the Hejaz absorbed plenty of Abrahamic beliefs and traditions, and even the Kaabah which was essentially a Pagan shrine had a tradition which was connected to Abraham and his Biblical progeny and even to Biblical men before it, all the way to Adam.

Muhammad's agenda was very focused. He wanted to break the economic and political monopoly the Quraysh tribe had over Mecca and its Kaabah. To cut through the scope of events... it led to a stage in which the region was divided to tribes who supported Muhammad and tribes who supported the Quraysh, with Jewish (and probably other) tribes also put into a position in which they have to support either of the sides in several instances. It's important to note that the main war was between Muhammad's followers and the Quraysh and their supporters, you can look at it as a civil war in the Arabian peninsula. One of the most interesting episodes about this scenario is that many of the Hunufa, who were Arabic monotheistics actually went and stressed their support for the Pagan Quraysh, because of their allegiance to the Quraysh as guardians of the Kaabah. Likewise Jewish tribes, and other men and individuals had to make decisions and take pragmatic and political decisions in this conflict. Afterall, supporting Muhammad meant changing the entire status quo in the peninsula.

I also think that one of the most important things to remember about this debate is that Muhammad's aim was to break an economic-political monopoly. So all these claims of the universality of Islam are irrelevant to the argument. Muhammad dealt with the Quraysh and with the tribes of the Hejaz, the universality of Islam was developed gradually after his death.