Did Muhammad authored the Quran?

[firedragon]

Where there any witnesses who saw him in the cave at his first revelation?

No. But the OP gentleman believes it. So you should ask him this question.

 

[Bob Jones]

No. But the OP gentleman believes it. So you should ask him this question.

ok

 

[Wasp]

Like so many other religions..Confucius,Tao,Buddha, Shiva, Hesus..etc..all of them are based on an oral tradition. In those days only the super elite had an education. Mistakes, embellishments,interlopers and forgeries was very common before the printing press.

What kind of oral tradition? The quran hasn't been just any oral tradition. The term in itself doesn't say much.

 

[Raymann]

ou said that you believe Muhammed was in the cave. WHY DO YOU BELIEVE IT? WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THIS HADITH SO MUCH? DO YOU BELIEVE ALL THE HADITH OR JUST THIS ONE? IF YOU BELIEVE THIS WHY NOT BELIEVE ALL THE HADITH?

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THIS HADITH? This Hadith is found in a book dated 700 years after Muhammed died. 700 years. So again, why would you believe this hadith? Do you really really believe this story? Why?

Wow, are you alright?
Let me quote my previous response:
"Now again, why do I believe Muhammad was in the cave and why I believe in the hadith?
Just because it is the overwhelming consensus that that is how it happened, no other reason."

Are you having a problem understanding my English?
I think that is a pretty clear response to your questions.
I haven't read many hadith so no I don't believe in all the hadith.
Isn't Sahir Bukhari's collection of Hadith some of the most trusted among the Islamic Scholars?
That Hadith is found on Sahir Bukhari's collection.

 

[Wasp]

I learned many things and then the Hadith.

So you read all of the commentary and learned nothing? How is that even possible?

 

[Wasp]

Wow, are you alright?
Let me quote my previous response:
"Now again, why do I believe Muhammad was in the cave and why I believe in the hadith?
Just because it is the overwhelming consensus that that is how it happened, no other reason."

Then why don't you believe in bukhari and the quran if you believe in overwhelming consensus?

 

[Raymann]

Then why don't you believe in bukhari and the quran if you believe in overwhelming consensus?

This is getting really weird now.
My OP is based on the Quran and a Sahir Bukhari hadith so I am not the one who doesn't believe in the Quran and Bukhari.
You are misinterpreting what you are reading.

 

[LuisDantas]

Muhammed couldn't read and write.

Muhammad was a merchant, which means that he had at the very least a strong incentive to learn to write the basic numerals before he ever considered a career as a prophet.

And while I understand that the traditions that insist on claiming that he ever was and remained fully illiterate are persistent and influential, nonetheless they do not sound particularly believable. He was active as a prophet for about 23 years, and for much of that time was surrounded by people who definitely could read and write and considered him the prophet of God. If he truly never learned to read, it not out of lack of access to potential teachers and certainly not because they did not want to help him.

And I think that we can all agree that he expected or at least hoped that the Qur'an would be remembered and read for many generations. It would be truly amazing if he did not have at least a modicum of desire to learn read a work so closely tied to his own memory. And maybe that is why so many insist that he would not; that helps in presenting him as a not fully human personage, someone beyond the normal urges of everyday people.

 

[Moz]

Like so many other religions..Confucius,Tao,Buddha, Shiva, Hesus..etc..all of them are based on an oral tradition. In those days only the super elite had an education. Mistakes, embellishments,interlopers and forgeries was very common before the printing press.

HI
I have never understood the excuse that "Only the super elite had an education. " and therefore writing was somehow a rare phenonenom in the early Islamic world,

That is such crap. By 642ce the moslems had conquered TWO thousand year old HIGHLY literate empires and absorbed a highly educated public service that was expert in copying, without errors, writings in multiple languages.
It is clear from the account of Jerusalems capture that the educated were left in place ,if they chose to stay, and were used by the incoming masters as functionaries, transaltors and notaries.The lakmid and Ghassanid arabs, that were the shocktroops of the conquest, were highly literate and "civilised" through their many years as mercenaries for the romans and Persians.
The only excuse for there being little written evidence of anything Islamic before the mid 700's is because there was nothing particularly islamic to record about the first few decades of the conquest and the foundation stories of the faith were later imperial constructions to make Islam seem more seperate from the religions that it so obviously arose from.
Peace

 

[firedragon]

"Now again, why do I believe Muhammad was in the cave and why I believe in the hadith?
Just because it is the overwhelming consensus that that is how it happened, no other reason."

Ah. So the overwhelming consensus is also to believe in many other Hadiths. Im not gonna give you examples because there's too many. Do you believe all of them?

And to honour your question about Sahih Buhari, no, no one considers all of his collections and every hadith as authentic. He is only a collector according to the most extreme believers of Ahadith.

But its unique to see a critic like you believe in the hadith so fiercely.

 

[Shia Islam]

When you read about the history of Muhammad and Islam inevitably you are going to stop at certain points, scratch your head and think, wait a minute, that doesn't seem right.
That doesn't seem, right? or should I have said that doesn't seem convincing?
It is my understanding that Muhammad received the revelations from an unidentified voice while in the cave.
Muhammad didn't know who was the one giving him the revelations and the voice giving the revelations didn't identify himself.
Muhammad told Khadijah about it and both told what had happened to Khadijah's cousin Wahraka ibn Nawfaal.
Wahraka ibn Nawfaal was a converted Christian so obviously he knew a lot about Christianity and the Gospels. He knew about the Christian "Angel Gabriel".
Basically Wahraka ibn Nawfaal put in Muhammad's head that he was a prophet, that the one giving him the revelations was Angel Gabriel and that the revelations were from Allah.
Is it possible that Muhammad took advantage of the situation and ran with it?
Is it possible that Muhammad is the real author of the Quran?
There are many revelations that are very suspicious and seem to be addressed with the sole purpose of benefitting Muhammad.
Why didn't Angel Gabriel identified himself and explained the revelations were from Allah?
Anyway, this is all my personal thinking and my personal reasons why I have a problem believing in Islam.

hi,

if this Hadith is correct then it will certainly raise questions about the truthiness of the prophet-hood of Muhhammad (s).

However as Shia Muslim we reject this Hadith in the same manner that we reject many of the Sunni Hadiths.

Then it can be proved logically that this Hadith is wrong.

here are some evidences:

1. Muslims believe that Muhammad was not a normal human, since his birth miracles happened to him. and many of Judeo-Christian scholars recognized him since his childhood as the coming prophet.

2. Since his childhood he was supported by some kind of angel like creature called Rooh-al-Quds. This can be translated as the holy-ghost, but this should not be confused withy the Holy-Ghost in Christianity.

3. Anybody who would dedicate himself to truly study Islam, would conclude that the Quran and its related Islamic teachings can't be made up by Muhammad.

4. It is clearly that Muhammad believed in himself as a true messenger. Since the Muslim were weak and very small in number, and were persecuted by the Meccans, Muhammad prophesized that they will defeat the Romans and Persians.

These are just quick evidences, more can be easily found.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Always difficult to be 100% sure if claims are facts or not. Even if billions believe, all can be wrong (God's speciality is His perfect Leela, Maya; He is well known for this).

ShirdiWiki: Another Leela, true or not?
Sai Baba of Shirdi - Wikipedia
More recent even, you forgot Shirdi Sai Baba (25.000 visiters daily; talking about replication). And said to be Avatar, as Krishna was.

I have to admit the Koran is incredible, especially when compared to what Shirdi left us behind (as written book).

But 1 thing Shirdi emphasized, is to stop criticizing other religions.

Born at almost the same time as Bahaullah (died 1892, Shirdi died 1918), this can be coincidence, but I don't believe this.

Bahaullah was used to improve Islam and Shirdi came to improve Hinduism and Islam (fighting others who's way is the Highway)

Spoiler: Shirdi Sai Baba revered by Hindus

Hindus
During Sai Baba's lifetime, the Hindu saint Anandanath of Yewala declared Sai Baba to be a "spiritual diamond."[57] Another saint, Gangagir, also called him a "jewel."[57] Sri Beedkar Maharaj greatly revered Sai Baba and in 1873, when he met him he bestowed the title Jagad guru upon him.[58][59] Sai Baba was also greatly respected by Vasudevananda Saraswati (known as Tembye Swami).[60] He was also revered by a group of Shaivic yogis, known as the Nath-Panchayat.[61] He is considered an avatar of the Supreme Reality (Brahman or God), a satguru, or saint, depending on individual proclivities. This is not uncommon in Hinduism where there is no central doctrine or cosmology, but a basis in individual faith and spirituality.

Spoiler: Shirdi Sai Baba revered by Parsis (Meher Baba)

Parsis
Saibaba was revered by prominent Zoroastrians such as Nanabhoy Palkhivala, Farhaad Panthaky and Homi Bhabha, and has been cited as the Zoroastrians' most popular non-Zoroastrian religious figure.[62]

Meher Baba, who was born into a Zoroastrian family, met Sai Baba once, during World War I, in December 1915. This event is considered as the most significant in Meher Baba's life. Shri Sai Satcharita (Sai Baba's life story), makes no mention of Meher Baba but Lord Meher, the life story of Meher Baba, there are numerous references to Sai Baba.[56]

Meher Baba, who claimed he was an (the) Avatar, credited his Avataric advent to Upasni, Sai Baba, and three other Perfect Masters: Hazrat Babajan, Hazrat Tajuddin Baba, and Narayan Maharaj. He declared Sai Baba to be a Qutub-e-Irshad (the highest of the five Qutubs, a "Master of the Universe" in the spiritual hierarchy).[63] This classification of avatar and satgurus and the associated name is applied within the Meher Baba community alone.

It’s a beautiful feeling to be free from prejudice and respect all religions. All who teach this concept are bringing our war torn world closer to peace. It leads to brotherhood and I always feel welcome by you because you have this enlightened understanding that we are all one.

 

[loverofhumanity]

They do appear to people. So some have seen even. So indeed Their influence is immense.


They even do materialize when need is there


Agreed.

And also more fun to find out myself by personal experience as compared to "believe" from stories of others you not even hear first hand or second hand

Nowadays most people rely on "Google hand" stories. I can understand they come to the conclusion "God does not exist"

Yes I forgot people do have visions and dreams. One example I know of is Tahirih one of the first disciples of the Bab. She never met Him personally but in a dream after which she accepted Him.

The disciples of Christ also had visions of Moses and God on Mount Tabor. We can all experience these things but not all of them are necessarily from God.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Quran (96:1) Recite1 in the name of your Lord2 Who created,3 (96:2) created man from a clot of congealed blood.4 (96:3) Recite: and your Lord is Most Generous, (96:4) Who taught by the pen,5 (96:5) taught man what he did not know.6

You can see it by yourself, Angel Gabriel never identified himself and although it clearly mentions what appears to be a divine being, it doesn't identify who this God is?
The rest I explained in the OP.


I do believe it is all fabricated but I also understand that it took a unique person with the right personality, at the right time and in the right place to accomplish it.
Islam, its expansion and durability is nothing short than incredible but that doesn't prove the existense of a real God behind it.
The fact that something like this happened 1400 years ago responds by itself to your claim that it could be easily replicated.
No, it cannot be easily replicated, time has proven that it cannot.
Why the success of Islam?
The aggressive nature at the beginning, expanding and holding grounds and the aggressive nature in holding its members.
Islam recruits members in a much more aggressive manner than any other religion in our times and maybe in history.
The population of every new territory conquered is immediately put under tremendous pressure to convert to the religion.
"Fight them until they convert or pay the jizya "
Look at the Muslim territories today. There were no Muslims in Africa and the Middle East before Islam began their expansion.
Egypt Copts Christians are having a hard time surviving under the pressure from Muslims.
The same happens in every single Muslim country, there is always the pressure to convert you to the religion.
A lot of people choose to leave when Muslims are the majority, it happens everywhere, even in some neighborhoods in western countries now.
The claim that there is freedom of religion in Islam is absolutely false.
If you leave Islam, you have abandoned your immediate family and social friends and you could end up risking your life. That's how it works, Islam is very jealous of its members. it is going to do what it can to retain them more than any other religion.
That's how Islam has been so successful in a nutshell.

Hello. You make some good points and I can see the dilemma many have. I believe that the Islam taught by Muhammad and the Quran is vastly different from the Islam taught by the religious leaders of today who have a vested interest in power and wealth which God doesn’t have. All religions have their spring, summer, autumn and winter when, after time, they become just an outward semblance of the spiritual truth they once taught.

That’s why religions are renewed from time to time and each religion has prophecies Of it’s own renewal in the future because a quality of this world is that all things decay including religion.

So for Christians it is the second coming when ‘all things will be made new. For Buddhists, Maitreya Buddha will appear, for Zoroastrian, Shah Bahrain the Saviour, for Jews Messiah Ben David and for Muslims the Great Announcement.

Krishna said that when religion decays He descends from millennium to millennium to renew religion and destroy wickedness.

In reality there is only one religion evolving over time but as the new Teacher or Educator was not accepted by the previous religions then divisions occurred. If for example if all Jews had accepted Jesus then there would only have remained one religion of God and if all Hindus and accepted Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad all would have been of one faith and so on. But religious leaders carved out their fiefdoms and rejected the new Messenger to maintain their power and wealth so divisions in humanity occurred.

Now is the time of our maturation when we can view the entire planet as one home and all human beings as one family so these invisible barriers and prejudices can be overcome through knowledge and education.

Instead of a ‘we’, religions are seeing the world in an us vs them perspective so they are a cause of conflict and wars. Only when religions mature to accept each other as equals can there be peace.

 

[Bob Jones]

So you read all of the commentary and learned nothing? How is that even possible?

I learned alot. Just about every other page was a reference to one of his wives or girlfriend having their monthly period. Due to political/fascist correctness,that is all I will say.

 

[Raymann]

But its unique to see a critic like you believe in the hadith so fiercely.

Well I think you're exaggerating a bit here, I don't believe in this hadith fiercely, I always use the general consensus as a strong indicator to figure out the logical path to the truth.
That hadith is found in the collection of Sahih Bukhari who according to my research is one of the two most trustworthy collectors of authentic hadith in the Sunni Muslim world.
Of course, if you are a Shia then I'm not sure how trustworthy you consider Sahih Bukhari's collection of hadith.
Sahih Bukhari completed the collection of Hadith by 846 AD which means 214 years after Muhammad's death.
You insisted that this hadith dated 700 years after the death of Muhammad.
How do you explain that?
To answer your question I don't believe in all Hadith, as a matter of fact, I only know very few of them but if they are considered authentic by the majority of Muslims then that's where I place my bet.

 

[firedragon]

Well I think you're exaggerating a bit here, I don't believe in this hadith fiercely, I always use the general consensus as a strong indicator to figure out the logical path to the truth.

Sure. But you said you believe that hadith. Your whole opening post post was on the belief that this story about Muhammed being in the cave is as you said "you believe".

Now you are saying I am a Shia which I am not, and is irrelevant to my question about " why you believe this story".

Of course you dont believe inn all hadith. Anyone knows that. The question why you believe in this particular hadith. If you dont believe inn all, why would you cherry pick this one to "believe". Maybe you should revisit your opening post. And you have said that you believe it because its "considered authentic by the majority of Muslims then that's where I place my bet." which is strange because you believe in one hadith because a lot of Muslims believe its true.

SO do you believe in everything Muslims believe? Or just one particular story alone? Why do you pick this particular story from all the other stories that "Muslims believe"? Whats so special?

 

[Phaedrus]

Muslims claim that because Muhammad was illiterate, he could not have written the Qur’an, and thus the Qur'an is a miracle, Muhammad's primary miracle. This idea of illiteracy is supported in the Qur’an:

Sura 7:157: "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures), - in the law and the Gospel..."

Sura 7:158 – Say: "O men! I am sent unto you all, as the Apostle of God, to Whom belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth: there is no god but He: it is He That giveth both life and death. So believe in God and His Apostle, the Unlettered Prophet, who believeth in God and His words: follow him that (so) ye may be guided."

Was Muhammad Illiterate?

 

[Raymann]

SO do you believe in everything Muslims believe?

Obviously not, I don't believe Allah exists.
The whole point of this thread is believing something that no Muslims believe.
All Muslims believe in Allah and its messenger and I don't.
What we have in common is that we share the same information and scriptures.
I have to read the Quran and some Hadith in order to establish my point.
I cannot invent stories, I can read the scriptures and find curiosities that maybe other people have overlooked and wonder about it.
My point is based on facts that can be proven by reading the scriptures (Quran and Hadith).

Now you are saying I am a Shia which I am not

No I didn't say you are a Shia.
I said that the majority of Sunni Muslims trust Sahih Bukhari Hadith but IF YOU ARE A SHIA (which I don't know if you are) then you maybe don't trust Sahih Bukhari Hadith like them.
The question is (since you insist on that hadith).
What reason do you have to believe that hadith is not authentic or the story in it is not true?
How about being 700 years old?

 

[firedragon]

Was Muhammad Illiterate?

Honestly, you never know. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't.

the verses inn the Quran that says Ummi naby, could easily mean "Gentile prophet" if one is to stick to an English word like that. Or "One who wasn't brought up with scripture in their teachings". Thats what Ummi means.