According to /his/, was Muhammad real?
yes if we hold the evidence to the same standards applied to many other historical figures generally accepted as real
Unfortunately yes.
>>1118647
There's a Syriac account from the 7th century that mentions his name, so he was real. That's about all we can really be sure of. He's not all that different from Jesus in that regard.
what does /his/ think of islam?
We know he was real. It's not like with Jesus where we have no real evidence for his existence.
What's up for debate is whether or not his claims about god and all that are true. And that's a resounding "no".
>>1118705
As a historical subject it's quite fascinating, especially recently with the rise of the new revisionist theories in the past two decades challenging the old narratives.
>>1118705
A poor derivative of Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Judaism. In essence, the Book of Daniel, the Book of Revelation and the majority of the Quran are one and the same book. It's "we're good, they're bad, on the Day of Judgement God will kick their asses, and we will live in paradise". Pretty unoriginal if you ask me.
All Islam had going for it was the fact that Heraclius decided to destroy the whole of Persia and deplete his own empire in the process. Now it's just an empty shell of its former self, and will probably be turned into some feelgood doctrine like Christianity was
>>1118707
The evidence is equally sparse and equally definitive for both Jesus and Muhammad. The assumption that we have no real evidence for Jesus but we do for Muhammad is a lag in the application of critical skepticism given to early Christian sources that historians have only just begun doing for early Muslim sources.
At best, just like with Jesus, we know there were people who followed someone named Muhammad from Arabia within a half-century of his supposed death.
>>1118705
Worst religion, at least western sexism makes something of women, islamic sexism just turns women into black ghost robotic maids
Having children and conquering land always helps prove your existance
>>1118726
>existance
>>1118718
Oh, my bad. I didn't know that. I figured Mohammad came later, so maybe there were more sources or accounts documenting him than there were of Christ.
>>1118726
There's no real proof for either of those things however. All the earliest sources of the period, whether non-Muslim or Arab rock graffiti, only ever references the conquests of Abu Bakr and Umar, excepting Thomas Presbyter though he writes after Muhammad's death.
>>1118735
The tl;dr of early Muslim historical sources is that we don't actually start getting any Muslim accounts until around a century after the Arab conquests. Until then we only have mosque and coin archaeology (which is silent for decades about Muhammad) and non-Muslim sources which mostly talks about the Rashidun and Umayyad caliphs.
>>1118719
>black ghost robotic maids
thats pretty hot actually
>>1118705
>>1118705
A conqueror's code for a conquering tribe.
>>1118710
>revisionist theories
I am seeing this so fucking much
>Islam had slavery, yes. BUT we treated our slaves with kindness and high regard. It was sinful to hurt a slave so no one ever did it. Islam is a religion of peace and the West attacked us.
>The Ottoman Empire was the defender of the Middle East from Western Colonialism.
>Turkey was a founding member of the EU but never joined officially
>The Islamic Golden Age invented everything Europe uses today. Europe stole everything from Islam. Islam is original and very peaceful until the evil Crusaders and Mongols destroyed everything.
>The Ottoman Empire was super strong until it was forced to dismantle after WWI
>The Abbasid and the Umayyad Caliphate peacefully spread Islam. People easily accepted Muhammad.
>>1118803
>I am seeing this so fucking much
Yet none of the things you listed are part of the revisionist school of thought in current Islamic studies. They're just pleb or apologist memes, no better or more relevant and worth anyone's time than the reactionary contrarian myths that naturally follows.
>>1118705
Arab goat-fucking war-mongering, barbaric conquering religion. It's a shame that civilised places like Persia fell victim to it
>>1118813
I am talking from a History revisionist that people of academia and Muslim stand point.
>Pleb or apologist memes
oh dear, its one of these kind of anons.
>>1118705
pretty ebin religion
>>1118825
Dear Allah, did they have Guns?
Muhammad must have divine wrathed the heathens
>>1118824
>I am talking from a History revisionist that people of academia and Muslim stand point.
You might have to reword this sentence so that it makes better sense. And what academic revisionist - that is a historian of Islam and the Middle East - has made those claims? Because those are precisely the sort of pseudo-history claims made in the public debate between "intellectuals," not academics. Hell, most of them have anything to do with early/proto-Islam which is the whole focus of the modern revisionist school.
Revisionist here means Patricia Crone, Fred Donner, Joseph Schacht, etc, not amateurs, non-historians, and religious clerics.
>>1118846
Muhammad was dead by then.
>>1118851
>Hell, most of them have anything
*nothing
>>1118851
>Muhammad was dead by then.
Muhammad isn't dead
>>1118851
what are some of these theories?
>>1118851
>not amateurs, non-historians, and religious clerics.
Ah, so anyone you've never heard of. Brush brush off.
>>1118862
If they're not trained historians with some relevant degree and haven't published to peer reviewed historical journals, then they're by definition amateurs or preachers in this field.
>>1118859
Donner has a lecture that runs through his thesis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RFK5u5lkhA
Schacht proposes that much of the hadith are products not of 7th century Mecca and Medina but instead political and later religious struggles of the 8th and 9th centuries. Crone argues that the office of caliph was not originally a successor to Muhammad, but instead a tribal leader succeeding from previous tribal leaders before him (in this case the Rashidun caliphs, who weren't yet caliphs but commanders of the faithful), and as the office gained more imperial flavor on the Byzantine/Sassanian model it started clashing with a parallel rising class of religious scholars who redefined it to what it is today.
>>1118887
So are University Professors with Doctorates amateurs or preachers?
Because what I listed is the shit I hear from them.
>>1118895
They can be both, because again, if they lack a relevant degree (i.e. history with a focus on early Islamic studies) and don't publish research papers on the subject they're giving opinions about, then their memes are as worthwhile as a lecture on computer programming from a professor of film.
Once again, name names, reference papers, or go to a better school, or wait for graduate studies.
>>1118895
University professors can also be preachers. Not just figuratively, but in the literal sense of giving religious sermons at a church or mosque.
>>1118915
Ahh but they do have a relevant degree with focus on islamic studies and publish research papers on the subjects
>memes
Shut the fuck up
>Go to a better school
I'm in the best school in my state
>graduate studies
Working on my masters right now
When are you gonna stop?
>>1118862
>Ah, so anyone you've never heard of. Brush brush off.
If they're literally-who tier they should be brushed off on principle. Who the fuck cares.
>>1118928
>Ahh but they do have a relevant degree with focus on islamic studies and publish research papers on the subjects
Name one.
Also
M E M E S
E
M
E
S
>>1118928
retards like you shouldnt be allowed to post on the history board
>>1118938
>If I have to start naming names
You kind of have to if you're gonna base a whole argument on supposed experts who have published works making outlandish statements that sound like a Salon article. Until then this is literally a "my dad works at Nintendo" claim.
>>1118928
Hey
Hey anon!
memes
>>1118959
>I dont need to post source you should all believe everythinh I say
Not this anon but I dont know how you want to be taken seriously like this
>>1118959
Why does every /his/ thread turn into an argument over who knows what and which idealogy is better?
Why can't we just act like adults and keep to the fucking point?!?!?!!??
>>1118938
You could have gone "WHOS THAT" when I listed some names of the academics I meant when I said revisionist, but you didn't. Know why? Because that'd be stupid - all of their credentials and major works are a google search away. Even PhD students these days have published articles that can be found.
Honestly it just sounds like you got triggered by the word revisionist and had to butt into a discussion that you're not all that familiar with a strawman.
>>1118959
I never once claimed authority. In fact I deferred to actual historians like Donner and Crone, and you're free to challenge theirs if you think you're up for it. But what I can claim is knowing bullshit when I see it. So congratulations, you either go to a terrible school, have no sense of who or what constitutes an authoritative voice on academic subjects, or made up the entire story.
>>1118966
Let's keep to the point. Shall we?
Yeah he was real. Our best guess and prevailing theory is that the Islamic story is more or less correct, aside from the obvious fantastical details.
The Islamic sources are reliable at least for the overall plot of his story.
>>1118705
You know it's a shitty religion which is incompatible with the west when Muslims are preaching reform of it.
>>1118803
>the west attacked us.
>>1118705
Religion of peace.
>>1118928
DANK MAY MAYS
A
N
K
M
A
Y
M
A
Y
S
>>1118705
Mostly harmful religion.
