Muhhamad never existed.

[Sha'irullah]

Is it possible that Muhammad never existed or not in the way we think? This has been pondering on the back of my mind for quite some time and has finally struck me later on after reading Sahih Muslim

I have been reading into this and have taken note of numerous accounts of Muhammad and have realized something, they are all from Muslim sources. No nonreligious ones exist to any greater degree.
Numerous events mentioned in ahadith that should have produced evidence in other cultures do not exist.
The Qur'an was produced during a time when a true Arabic script did not exist and was recorded from recitation supposedly. Now considering the natur eof hafiz now I would not find this odd but lately I have.
The production of hadith assigning details about Muhammad did not occur until far much later after his supposed death as well. When pondering about Muhammad people often fail to realize most information known about him comes from ahadith which are very shaky records about Muhammad. All hadith manipulate and control the Muslim life to a greater degree and seem to be more politicized and often add unnecessary mythology to the Qur'an such as Dajjal and the Night Journey by Muhammad.
One is mostly copied from the book of Revelations and the other is beyond mythological.
All of the used historical accounts of Muhammad had to be reproduced and written including the Qur'an.
Muhammad may have never existed or was perhaps a small figured in Arabic history depending on how you view it.
I know for a fact that the Qur'an circles much information from the Taurat and the Gospels while later information from the NT was added int he hadith. Oneof the biggest shockers for me is the exact detailshadiths give off and how they just so happen to coincide with Muhammad. Numerous records of precise information recorded years after his supposed death and they remained incurculation for over a century until written down. They appear more like bits of legend and folklore then oral information passed on. People cannot remember the color of other's eyes yet alone whether or not they removed their locks of hair before prayer and the constant usage of Muhammad's eating with his right hand.
I shall provide more information later such as the historical oddities

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Hey, I have some western-sourced info on the historical Muhammed. Only problem is...umm...it's kinda on my e-book and I kinda...umm...lost my charging cord...

:sad:

If I can find it or (more likely) source a new one, I'll see what I can see.

 

[Thrinaxodon]

I've heard of some sources, from other cultures. I forgot the names, but I remember the region.

 

[Breathe]

I suppose it's possible, but not very likely. I expect Muhammad did exist.
The reason I think it's most likely he existed is because there's people who claimed to have known him in recent memory; he wasn't exactly from years ago. I know, not a strong reason, but still...

 

[james bond]

SA, I thought you were going atheist or agnostic now claiming Muhammad didn't exist and that you can't prove a negative .

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't think Muhammad is quite ancient enough or legendary enough to not have existed at all. Some aspects of his existence may have been exagerated and, I suppose, it is not impossible that he is fully legendary. But I do believe he did exist and was a significant religious, political and military leader.

 

[Breathe]

I don't think Muhammad is quite ancient enough or legendary enough to not have existed at all. Some aspects of his existence may have been exagerated and, I suppose, it is not impossible that he is fully legendary. But I do believe he did exist and was a significant religious, political and military leader.

Yeah, same here


I expect a lot of things about him have been exaggerated and mythified and other things (for example, an interpretation of something like "his sweat smelled like perfume" or whatever; doubtfully true, but maybe with the basis he didn't smell when he would sweat (happens), or whatever), with some things probably attributed to him that he didn't do (and probably some he wouldn't have wanted), and possibly some minor things may have been ignored or even whitewashed.


But, I think he existed, and I expect a fair amount of stuff attributed to him is fairly legitimate.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I'm sure there were at least a few guys named Muhammad around back then.

I'm also sure no person, living or dead, bears much resemblance to the mythologized individual loosely based on them.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Yeah, same here


I expect a lot of things about him have been exaggerated and mythified and other things (for example, an interpretation of something like "his sweat smelled like perfume" or whatever; doubtfully true, but maybe with the basis he didn't smell when he would sweat (happens), or whatever), with some things probably attributed to him that he didn't do (and probably some he wouldn't have wanted), and possibly some minor things may have been ignored or even whitewashed.


But, I think he existed, and I expect a fair amount of stuff attributed to him is fairly legitimate.

I believe his existence was fair more minor then how most Muslims elevate him. Most records during that era will mention the occupation of Arabs and not "Muslims" and no religious information is found. This did not occur until some centuries after. Most likely Islam was formed around Muhammad after his death death and the attributes found in ahadith are just oral tradition stacked with numerous amounts of folklore and myth on top. I honestly doubt Muhammad was a military leader actually. I believe his name came into occurrence to maintain the Arab territories and it was not he himself who did so. The great divide seems more like a political issue then a religious one.
Look at how Shi'ites attribute divine aspects to Muhammad from their ahadith which they claim are valid. Each one says the same thing yet their textual information is so different. This places most of their narrations collected as more myth then fact to a larger degree then what you think.

 

[England my lionheart]

I think he existed,however,the Muhammed described in the hadiths is debatable even to Muslims IMO.

 

[Matemkar]

Salam.

It is not possible he (pbuh&hp) never existed. And even if one does not care about history recorded by muslims and non-muslims as well, he/she can go to Yasrib/Madina to meet him and also his ahlulbayt and companions in the Baqi cemetery..

The Qur'an was produced during a time when a true Arabic script did not exist and was recorded from recitation supposedly. Now considering the nature of hafiz now I would not find this odd but lately I have.

We believe the miracles are picked according to the interest of the people.. E.g sorcery and magic in Egypt and wisards of Pharaoh being stunned by miracles of Moses.. Medicine in Palestine and Jesus resurrecting people with his breath, healing them with his touch..

Likewise; since unlike what you said, Arabic script was there that time : Classical Arabic And poetry was the only thing appreciated among the arabs and they were the best (at writing, memorizing, reciting in amusement gatherings etc.) See: Mu'allaqat And though Prophet Muhammad (pbuh&hp) was unschooled: The Unschooled Prophet the miracle; Quran he brought was unique to them: Understanding the Uniqueness of the Qur'an and enchanted them all (to the extent that the poets burnt the seven famous poems which were hung on the walls of Kabah.. Though Bedouins refused to become muslims, they prostrated in admiration on hearing the verses.)

Ok.. I have a book suggestion on Quran brother.. Hope you study it: Qur'an in Islam

Also for the history of islam (both from the muslim and non-muslim sources compiled) can be found here: Restatement of History of Islam and Muslims

Numerous events mentioned in ahadith that should have produced evidence in other cultures do not exist.

[...]

The production of hadith assigning details about Muhammad did not occur until far much later after his supposed death as well. When pondering about Muhammad people often fail to realize most information known about him comes from ahadith which are very shaky records about Muhammad.

The Quranic verses, just after the revelations were always recorded and made known to everybody. but hadiths were not like that.. Not everybody heard all or memorised all.. Imam Ali on Hadith Narrators It is true that some certain things told about him (pbuh&hp) may not be true. Knowing that the caliphs after him banned recording ahadith and it continued for a while. Then the "scholars" of Umayyad and Abbasid empires added some, changed some and kept some secret.. So, to differ truth from falsehood a thorough study of science of hadith is needed..

All hadith manipulate and control the Muslim life to a greater degree and seem to be more politicized and often add unnecessary mythology to the Qur'an such as Dajjal and the Night Journey by Muhammad.

Night journey (Israa) is there in Quran. And even there is a chapter named after it. Surat Al-'Isra' And miraaj (ascension) is no different.. Me'raj - The Night Ascension

Brother, as for Dajjal (anti-christ - the arrogant powers claiming to be christian but working against his teachings) and Sufyan (the hypocrite "muslim" powers), though the hadiths sound mythological, they are not.. One just needs to study the language of hadiths.. Sunni scholar Said Nursi's interpretations on islamic eschatology; akhir al-zaman (the end times) and Dajjal, Sufyan and other things for instance, are good examples.. THE END TIMES.pdf However, I must note, none of these are among the basic tenets of islam.. I mean, none can condemn a muslim who does not believe in them..

Brother, I also suggest, if you have time, to have a look at the books by Mutahhari.. They can help you with your studies. ma salam

 

[F0uad]

This topic

You know that Muhammad(saws) is buried in the Al-Masjid al-Nabawi right?
We still have hes letters (that were written by companions), hes body in the grave, belongings and ancient buildings with hes signature.

 

[Sha'irullah]

This topic

You know that Muhammad(saws) is buried in the Al-Masjid al-Nabawi right?
We still have hes letters (that were written by companions), hes body in the grave, belongings and ancient buildings with hes signature.

Well I do not mean to be aggressive but a tomb means very little. Funny you mention this because last I heard Abdul-Aziz wanted it destroyed.

But according to many they believed Muhammad was not the figure promoted from the Sunnah and the Qur'an was not the direct word for word copy of his teachings. There is much of a blank slate left in Arabia as of now honestly after Islam.

 

[BruceDLimber]

The Baha'i Faith explicitly stipulates the existence of Muhammad, to say the least!

Peace,

Bruce

 

[YmirGF]

While I personally believe that a man named Mohammad trotted about 1400+ years ago, there is no physical evidence from the period that can be confirmed as belonging to him.

 

[F0uad]

While I personally believe that a man named Mohammad trotted about 1400+ years ago, there is no physical evidence from the period that can be confirmed as belonging to him.

What about DNA tests, hes hair and hes signatures on many things?

 

[Sha'irullah]

What about DNA tests, hes hair and hes signatures on many things?

You mean to tell me the DNA to confirm a rotting corpse exist? Do you understand biology?
I have heard of museums housing strands of his hair before but I have never heard of any DNA evidence being provided.
Plus this is not a matter of him existing, it is a matter of him existing the way the narrations report him to have existed.

 

[LuisDantas]

Well, there is little doubt that, as Kilgore Trout put it, several people named Muhammad lived then and there.

The significant doubt is how accurate the reports of that specific leader are.

Maybe I am missing something, but how would DNA tests or hair help on that? Perhaps in establishing that the same one person has been in several places at specific times?

 

[Titanic]

I say maybe. If so though not as Islam proclaim's him too be. Islam is a real neat religion though.

 

[F0uad]

Well I do not mean to be aggressive but a tomb means very little. Funny you mention this because last I heard Abdul-Aziz wanted it destroyed.

But according to many they believed Muhammad was not the figure promoted from the Sunnah and the Qur'an was not the direct word for word copy of his teachings. There is much of a blank slate left in Arabia as of now honestly after Islam.

Who is many? According to my knowledge Secular Historians do agree that the the Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) did many things that are told in the hadiths.

How can a guy be promoted from the Sunnah while the Sunnah is promoted from him? The hadiths told us that the Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) send letters to different people and empires we still have these letters in existences, the hadiths talk about places, tribes, structures and all these things can be verified. If a Hadith tells us that the Prophet(peace and blessings upon him) build something with hes companions and this building is still in existences and is dated back to hes time will you then still deny he build it? With your argument i can deny all history books.

We even the Byzantine empire historians writing about Mohammed´s(peace and blessings upon him) in the year 634. We also have John Bar Penkaye a East Syriac Nestorian Christian who wrote about the prophet. There are so many sources, evidence that i can give that the historical Mohammed peace and blessings upon him) was the man as is described in the hadith even by Non Islamic sources.