Our dear Amin is saying that the original Islam was peaceful and civilized! No I'm not kidding! Part 5

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), May 12, 2018 at 10:18

Our dear Amin wrote this little gem:

>4. First biography of Mohammad was written by Ibn Ishaq commissioned by the Abbasid Khalif who was a warrior,

Ibn Ishaq's Sira is not extant. What we have is a redaction by Ibn Hisham Do you get it?

>so Ibn Ishaq made Muhammad a warrior as well,

So are you saying that Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham who redacted his book are liars? Were they making things up? and now a tablighee like you seem to know more than they did? Mash'allah! So how come Muslims have been reading Ibn Hisham for the past 1400 non stop?

But most damaging to your claim حفص or Hafs whose copy of the Qur'an we now have in the Cairo Qur'an has been described by the great scholars of Islam as حفص كذاب مدلس Or Hafs is a liar and plagiarist! And his Ahadith were bogus! So if we cannot believe his collection of the Ahadith why should we believe his copy of the Qur'an? So should we start reading Warsh's version from now?

Oh you don't believe me that Hafs was a liar and plagiarist as per the great scholars of Islam? Check this:

http://www.azahera.net/showthread.php?t=5446

And this link is from no other than al-Azhar!

What a disaster: Hafs was a liar!

For the readers: Just google كذاب مدلس with the name of any ancient Muslim scholar and you will find Muslims accusing him of being a liar and plagiarist!

What a disaster

So we are back to square: If we don't believe Ibn Ishaq/Ibn Hisham we are left with nothing about the biography of the so called prophet of Islam after all I challenge our dear Amin to reconstruct the life of Muhammad by reading the Qur'an only without what al-Mufasereen and the likes of Ibn Ishaq/Ibn Hisham wrote about him But remember that all of them must be liars!

>which he was not.

Prove it! I'm waiting

>This first biography was the inspiration and reference for all those who wrote about Muhammad's history.

Bogus There is nothing historical about what Ibn Ishaq wrote. Wansbrough and Lammens proved very well that the Sira literature is not real history It is Salvation History or pious fiction and it was no more than another form of tafsir for the opaque revelations of Allah in the confused and confusing Qur'an!

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".