I was recentlly reading a biography of Muhammad, * Life Of Muhammad* by Hussain Haykal. THe writer consistently maintained in his book that the life of Muhammad was human through and through and discarded all miracles ascribed to the Prophet (Saws)
About the splitting of Muhammad’s Chest by Angels, according to the writer, the story is based on the narrations of 2 or 3 year olds and hence cannot be regarded authentic.
The story of the Bahira’s predictions is not mentioned.
There is no mention of the splitting of the moon.
The web at entrance of the cave and the dove’s nest isdecribed as “an everyday miracle”
The Isra and Miraaj is described as a vision and a spiritual journey.
The descriptions of punishments given out to people during the Isra wal Miraaj is stated as “fertile imagination”.
The only miracle that the prophet had was the Quran.
I am not really sure, but I have been hearing these ‘stories’ all my life. Is the writer right in his assertions?
This writer is a fool, hell even a kafir! His blatant disregard of the miracles of the best of creation are disgusting. The miracles of the prophet have been narrated from the time of occurance until today, and many are talked about my big scholars.
Imam Hamza has an entire talk entitled : Al Isra Wal Miraj: The source of Knowledge"
This writer is obviously a moron, you should read:
Muhammad, By Martin LIngs, I've read most of it-its a lovely book. And its far more accurate, according to all sources I've ever heard/seen/come across ect, then the one your talking about.
Some one should give that Haykal a slap in the face!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mo_best: *
This writer is obviously a moron, you should read:
Muhammad, By Martin LIngs, I've read most of it-its a lovely book. And its far more accurate, according to all sources I've ever heard/seen/come across ect, then the one your talking about.
Some one should give that Haykal a slap in the face!
[/QUOTE]
Ditto, never read the book which contradicts your concepts, Call him Infidel and only read the Book of Martin Lings who was truly faithful.His book supports all your contentions so he must be right.
Another nifty idea is to call Hussain Haykal a blasphemous and hang him or may be order a fatwa to kill him by stoning.
The writer has also used a Quranic ayah which states (somewhat) that Prophet (saws) is not meant to induldge in miracle-mongering... I can't really find the ayah....i will post it when I find it.
Haykal's an excellent author. And mo_best he makes some very convincing and logical arguments to support his no-miracles theory. The splitting of the chest and the noor stuffing has been rejected by many a scholars (according to my knowledge). So, what's the big deal?
beatle I thought the writer did mention the Bahira predictions. I guess I might be mistaken.
mo_best if Lings wrote the book which has old English in it, that book was just a plain narration of events. While Haykal takes the time to compare various theories and views regarding important details and then formulates his own opinions.
In general can we just have respect for Dr. Haykal, he was a distinguished scholar and definitely more knowledgeable than all of us in this thread?
[QUOTE] Originally posted by sambrialian: *
Haykal's an excellent author. And mo_best he makes some very convincing and **logical* arguments to support his no-miracles theory. The splitting of the chest and the noor stuffing has been rejected by many a scholars (according to my knowledge). So, what's the big deal?
beatle I thought the writer did mention the Bahira predictions. I guess I might be mistaken.
mo_best if Lings wrote the book which has old English in it, that book was just a plain narration of events. While Haykal takes the time to compare various theories and views regarding important details and then formulates his own opinions.
In general can we just have respect for Dr. Haykal, he was a distinguished scholar and definitely more knowledgeable than all of us in this thread?
[/QUOTE]
The ideas were really very logically put. Could someone help me with finding the ayah?
I think you are right the Bahira Predictions were there, I'll get the book again as soon as i get my hands on it...
One more thing, according to the writer, Abraha's army was attacked by small pox, not the flying birds dropping baked clay as I have always read.
And He sent against them Flights of Birds, Striking them with stones of baked clay. *(Al fil: 3-4)*
In his book, he used the words "waves" of something instead of flights of birds....
[13:7] And those who disbelieve say: Why has not a sign been sent down upon him from his Lord? You are only a warner and (there is) a guide for every people.
[10:20] And they say: Why is not a sign sent to him from his Lord? Say: The unseen is only for Allah; therefore wait-- surely** I too, with you am of those who wait.**
"Muhammed" By Martin Lings is really the best book I have ever read on the life and times of the Prophet SAW. Even sent my dad a copy; he absolutely loved it. It's the most factual insightful book on the topic to date, and it's written by a non-muslim without any bias or prejudice whatsoever. Highly recommend it.
When I had read the book, the edition that I had did not mention anything about his conversion. It stated his degrees from Oxford etc.., but not any conversion. I remember this because I had made a point to look for it from the book publishers as well as on the net, coz then it makes a difference to me. I like to know WHO and WHAT the person is that I am reading, before I tackle his/her work.
HOWEVER, at one site recently I did read that he has converted to Sufism. I find that VERY hard to believe, because Lings did not seem the sort of person to whom mystic sufism woud appeal to. Were he to convert, it would in my mind most likely have been to Sunnism, or possibly orthodox Shia'ism, but of course I could be wrong. His book is well-founded on what I consider primarily a Sunni premise. Why he would choose to convert to Sufism, if he really did, is not evident from the book itself. Maybe his latter writings will give me some direction, but I have yet to read them.
Mo / sam , have u any credible links to information regarding his conversion?
There’s an interesting exchange of letters between Mustafa al-Kanadi and Martin Lings about certain problematic aspects of the latter’s work. They can be read here. (Note: The document is in Adobe Acrobat format).
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Soggy: *
[13:7] And those who disbelieve say: Why has not a sign been sent down upon him from his Lord? You are **only a warner* and (there is) a guide for every people.
[10:20] And they say: Why is not a sign sent to him from his Lord? Say: The unseen is only for Allah; therefore wait-- surely** I too, with you am of those who wait.**
[/QUOTE]
Thanks Soggy.
Sorry to spoil the on going discussion, but coming back to my question - can someone shed sone light on the incident of the elephant?
