implicating Quran/Sharia but exonerating Muhammad serves no purpose

Submitted by Prashant (United States), Feb 24, 2022 at 18:46

Dear Dr Pipes, In his above message the reader Dave presented a thesis that in my opinion serves no useful purpose. Dave seems to imply that Muhammad was some religious preacher who somehow preceded the Quran and sharia. Dave's thesis, if true, will not just change Islam. It will make the entire Islamic doctrine and mythology null and void and remove the basis of the belief of a billion Muslims.

The assumption that Muhammad was a nice and easy preacher is irrelevant. The entire history of humanity is loaded with nice and easy preachers and their existence is of no interest to Islam. If a nice and easy Muhammad existed before Quran and Sharia, he will have zero relevance to the modern day Muslims. It is the Muhammad who was a preacher combined with a military general, that is dear to Muslims. They won't take anything less than that. Modern Muslims might believe in Jesus or Krishna more easily than believe in this nice and easy Quran-less Muhammad.

The way Muslims understand the Islamic history, Muhammad and Quran happened at the same time. And, Sharia is --if I am not wrong-- is based on the principles outlined in the Quran and and/or the hadiths.
The fact that someone usurped a good Muhammad and deployed him for a bad purpose is irrelevant to this version of history.

Also, saying that Muhammad's definition of the believers included all monotheists is no panacea. It exonerates all people in today's Europe, Africa, and the Americas but still sends all Asians to the gallows and requires billions of barrels of fuel in hell. It is the noose and hell that pose the problem. The definition of believers is no problem whatsoever.

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".