I was brought up to believe that Muhammad lived his life in the full glare of history and was a well known and accepted figure and that this was authenticated/supported from multiple non-Islamic historical sources. I always believed that his birth, life, family, miracles, message, battle and death were a matter of historical record.
I have been reading into this and it seems that everything we know about Muhammad comes from Islamic sources. There are no independent references to Muhammad during his lifetime from Byzantine, Persian or Roman sources. All the details we know about his life come from Islamic sources.
So this leads to the question of whether Muhammad existed at all or whether he is a concocted personality embodying the philosophy and teaching of Islam created to give these ideas more relevancy or impact.
I would be interested in a list of non-Islamic sources from Muhammads lifetime which detail Muhammad's life, message and battles. Does anyone know of any?
Can I ask if you have actually read my post and if you have also read the wikipedia page you linked me to?
The reason I ask is because I asked if there is any evidence of Muhammad existing during Muhammad's lifetime (outside Islamic sources). And you linked me to a page that says..
no Byzantine or Syriac sources provide any detail on "Muhammad's early career ... which predate the Muslim literature on the subject".[45]
This page states the opposite of what I asked. I had actually already read this page and a few others before I asked this question. If I had already got the answer there then I wouldn't be asking here.
This page just confirms that any non-Muslim sources on Muhammad appear after Muhammad's lifetime when the Arabs actually made an impact outside their own area and carried with them a story/belief. Also the page you pointed me to states that Muhammad wasn't seen in those days as a Prophet or apostle but as an Arab King conquering territory. Not someone spreading a religion.
I find this confusing because from what I've read in Islamic sources. The neighbouring nations were well aware of Islam from the early days. Muslims sought asylum in neighbouring nations. Muhammad sent emissaries to neighbouring rulers and these rulers declared his prophecy after hearing about his piety and following. So I was expecting such information to be recorded or available but the only non Muslim information is post Muhammad's death and contradicts the Islamic sources.
Finally these sources claim Muhammad was still alive when Muslim sources had him already dead. So again they contradict the Islamic narrative on the subject.
Are you saying this wiki information on Muhammads life is what you prefer over the Islamic version that is taught? If so, then when do you think Muhammad started prosletysing. Was it after he conquered non-Arabs?
re: Historic Non-Muslim sources on Prophet Muhammad?
Can't blame Muslims for the memory hole at the infidel ministry of truth.
Also, this should prove as a lesson to not go around blowing up and hiding the graves and good and lawful historic artefacts that keep it obviously real in the minds of coming generations.
Re: Historic Non-Muslim sources on Prophet Muhammad?
The exponential rise of Islam in 6th and 7th century is sufficient proof for any skeptical non-Muslim about the existence of prophet Muhammad . It is very common that history is written by the winners and in this case it was Muslims.
Quit trolling. If anyone else has anything to add, contact us in the Helpdesk.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
. It is very common that history is written by the winners and in this case it was Muslims.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks