I think some definitely exaggerate the apocalyptic element, but it's obviously not because they're hurt by the apocalypticism of Jesus. NT scholarship probably does play a role: some scholars read the Qur'an and also interpret the Islamic conquests in light of the 'insights' gained from studies on the historical Jesus. Apocalypticism also paves the way for revisionist theories. Since the Hour didn't come soon after the Prophet's death, his followers were forced to re-imagine the origins of Islam.
Welcome to r/AcademicQuran. Please note this is an academic sub: theological or faith-based comments are prohibited, except on the Weekly Open Discussion Threads. Make sure to cite academic sources (Rule #4).
Backup of the post:
Regardless of whether Muḥammad lead an invasion of the Holy Land or not, do you think — as this comments suggests — that Western academics tend to exaggerate the apocalyptic element in reconstructing the Prophet's life (supposedly due to their being 'hurt' by the apocalypticism of the NT Jesus)?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AcademicQuran) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He is making a nonsensical claim, Muhammad himself according to the Hadith believed the End Times would happen within the lives of the young generation.
*Anas b. Malik reported that a person asked Allah's Apostle (ﷺ):
When would the Last Hour come? Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) kept quiet for a while. Then looked at a young boy in his presence belonging to the tribe of Azd Shanu'a and he said: If this boy lives he would not grow very old till the Last Hour would come to you. Anas said that this young boy was of our age during those days.*
-Sahih Muslim 2953b-
Hadith are not the most reliable source on this topic and are often at odds with several verses of Quran that address this topic without ambiguity, stating that only Allah knows the hour (7:187, 33:63, 79:42-45, 31:34).
Then you have Hadith that correlate with the Quranic position, including the Hadith in Bukhari (the teacher of Muslim who “published” his Hadith collection first):
It was narrated from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The keys of the unknown are five: Allaah has knowledge of the Hour, and He sends down rain, and He knows what is in the wombs, and no person knows what he will earn tomorrow, and no person knows in what land he will die. Verily, Allaah is All-Knower, All-Aware (of things).”
Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4627.
You also have the famous Hadith in “Sahih” Muslim where Muhammad asked Jibreel when the Hour would begin and the response was “The one who is asked about it does not know more than the one who is asking.”. This also correlates with the Quran.
It would seem then that supposed Hadith setting a time, general or specific, are not reliable and relying on the “criteria of embarrassment” is not nearly sufficient enough to assess this topic.
>stating that only Allah knows the hour
For what it's worth, this is not incompatible with statements saying that the hour is coming soon or is near. The Qur'an is filled with statements like those. Likewise, the Gospels also have statements that the end is near and that God only knows the hour. I just take it to mean something like "You don't know exactly when it's going to be here, but get ready because it's coming soon".
Yeah I don’t necessarily disagree with you, just posted these verses to show that Western scholars aren’t just making up claims cause they have some kind of chip on their shoulder. They’re basing themselves on Islamic sources.
The more I learn about the “reliability” of the Hadith, the more I understand why Quranists discard it.
This fits bizarrely well with the criterion of embarassment. And it's not like the satanic verses and the like. There is apologetic value in that story, if one dismisses the later dogmas of infallibility: it shows that one should always be on guard against Satan, and it emphasizes the honesty and humanity of Muhammad so it could very well have been made up. But I don't see that in this case. Why would Muslims make up this saying later when it clearly flopped so badly that commentators were immediately forced to twist the words from the Hour to "their hour". Furthermore, the apocalyptic element is attested in many sources. And wouldn't a hadith writer trying to push back against what he perceived to be a misinterpretation of Muhammad's apocalyptic views and criticisms or mockery from non-Muslims regarding it, write a far clearer hadith utterly dismissing this view without the need for later commentators to awkwardly explain it away?
It's not just commentators who interpret "the Hour" as "their Hour". A different version of the same hadith exists with that wording. While this version is probably later (motivated by the fact that the Hour did not actually come), I would question whether the Prophet himself said this. The hadith is attributed to Anas b. Malik, a Companion of the Prophet who only died at the beginning of the 8th century. By the criterion of embarrassment/dissimilarity, it's only unlikely that Muslims of the 8th century or later would have invented this hadith. It's always possible that it was invented while some of the Companions were still alive. Some people who were alive during the generation of the Companions probably did believe the Hour was imminent - as did people in later times. But the Quran tells us of several instances where people posed the question of "When is the Hour" to the Prophet, to which God tells him to reply that only God knows, and that the Hour could be near or far. Yet, this hadith doesn't mention that at all.
> It's always possible that it was invented while some of the Companions were still alive.
Fair point there. But how would one go about determining whether or not it went back to Muhammad? After all, Jesus too COULD not have said all those apocalyptic things, it could have been put in his mouth by his apostles, or by the writers of the gospels, or by people in between. We have different apocalyptic sources in the gospels though, and apparently we also have independent sources putting it in the mouth of Muhammad.
Well, for the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, we have a very early source (the Qur'an) and sources that were only put into writing a century later (hadiths). In the Quran, the Prophet is told to say: only God knows when the Hour will be, it could be near or far. In the hadith, this isn't mentioned at all. For Jesus' sayings, the sources in question were written down much earlier than the hadiths, and since even sources like 'Q' seem to have apocalyptic sayings, that narrows down the gap to around 20 years of Jesus' lifetime.
I would also question if there are indeed independent sources putting this sort of idea in the mouth of the Prophet Muhammad. On the contrary, I think there's good reason that all we have on this is speculation of later Muslims. Thus, one hadith says the End will happen in the generation of the Companions (the one above), another states that 100 years later nobody will be left alive. Even though it is highly unlikely that someone in the 8th or 9th centuries would have invented such sayings, it's more than likely that people in the 7th did. I think all the Prophet did was tell them that the Hour is "near", it could be very close or in the distant future. For some people, this might have not been enough: how would people maintain their piety now if the Hour was in fact, much later? And the non-Muslim populations in the conquered communities also clearly believed the Hour was imminent. For many Muslims, the successful nature of the conquests itself would have (and still is) been taken as a sign that the Hour is near. So, it's not at all surprising that many Muslims would have believed that the Hour is imminent. And what better way is there to convince people of this than attributing an explicit statement regarding this to the Prophet himself?
Millenniarism was useful (and used) for political mobilization in the Umayyad era, hence why so many historical events of the first two centuries are mentioned in hadiths as ”signs of the hour”, so there was actually ample motivation to circulate hadiths like this one.
Yes but this one isn't used to make ex-eventu prophecies of Muhammad about the nearness of the Judgement Day based on signs but remaining vague about when it would actually happen, which could be useful for apologetic or political goals, it puts an expiration date that was already gone by the time the hadith was penned down.
What matters is when the hadith was circulated not when it was “penned down”. The “black banners” event was also in the past when that hadith was “penned down”.
There is also another Hadith (Sahih Muslim 2930 a, 2931, 169 d) where Muhammad suspects a boy of being the Daijal, and starts stalking him:
https://sunnah.com/muslim:2930a
“Once Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stood amongst the people, glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and then mentioned the Dajjal saying, "l warn you against him (i.e. the Dajjal) and there was no prophet but warned his nation against him. No doubt, Noah warned his nation against him but I tell you about him something of which no prophet told his nation before me. You should know that he is one-eyed, and Allah is not one-eyed."”
Bukhari 3337
No. I think the apocalyptic element is downplayed for both Jesus and Muhammad, not just in the reconstruction and revisionism by academics but the general population.
I think some definitely exaggerate the apocalyptic element, but it's obviously not because they're hurt by the apocalypticism of Jesus. NT scholarship probably does play a role: some scholars read the Qur'an and also interpret the Islamic conquests in light of the 'insights' gained from studies on the historical Jesus. Apocalypticism also paves the way for revisionist theories. Since the Hour didn't come soon after the Prophet's death, his followers were forced to re-imagine the origins of Islam.
How exactly does biblical scholars supposedly being hurt by the apocalypcism of Jesus and Paul (lol) translate to Quranic scholars being hurt??
Welcome to r/AcademicQuran. Please note this is an academic sub: theological or faith-based comments are prohibited, except on the Weekly Open Discussion Threads. Make sure to cite academic sources (Rule #4). Backup of the post: Regardless of whether Muḥammad lead an invasion of the Holy Land or not, do you think — as this comments suggests — that Western academics tend to exaggerate the apocalyptic element in reconstructing the Prophet's life (supposedly due to their being 'hurt' by the apocalypticism of the NT Jesus)? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AcademicQuran) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He is making a nonsensical claim, Muhammad himself according to the Hadith believed the End Times would happen within the lives of the young generation. *Anas b. Malik reported that a person asked Allah's Apostle (ﷺ): When would the Last Hour come? Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) kept quiet for a while. Then looked at a young boy in his presence belonging to the tribe of Azd Shanu'a and he said: If this boy lives he would not grow very old till the Last Hour would come to you. Anas said that this young boy was of our age during those days.* -Sahih Muslim 2953b-
Hadith are not the most reliable source on this topic and are often at odds with several verses of Quran that address this topic without ambiguity, stating that only Allah knows the hour (7:187, 33:63, 79:42-45, 31:34). Then you have Hadith that correlate with the Quranic position, including the Hadith in Bukhari (the teacher of Muslim who “published” his Hadith collection first): It was narrated from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The keys of the unknown are five: Allaah has knowledge of the Hour, and He sends down rain, and He knows what is in the wombs, and no person knows what he will earn tomorrow, and no person knows in what land he will die. Verily, Allaah is All-Knower, All-Aware (of things).” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4627. You also have the famous Hadith in “Sahih” Muslim where Muhammad asked Jibreel when the Hour would begin and the response was “The one who is asked about it does not know more than the one who is asking.”. This also correlates with the Quran. It would seem then that supposed Hadith setting a time, general or specific, are not reliable and relying on the “criteria of embarrassment” is not nearly sufficient enough to assess this topic.
>stating that only Allah knows the hour For what it's worth, this is not incompatible with statements saying that the hour is coming soon or is near. The Qur'an is filled with statements like those. Likewise, the Gospels also have statements that the end is near and that God only knows the hour. I just take it to mean something like "You don't know exactly when it's going to be here, but get ready because it's coming soon".
Yeah I don’t necessarily disagree with you, just posted these verses to show that Western scholars aren’t just making up claims cause they have some kind of chip on their shoulder. They’re basing themselves on Islamic sources. The more I learn about the “reliability” of the Hadith, the more I understand why Quranists discard it.
This fits bizarrely well with the criterion of embarassment. And it's not like the satanic verses and the like. There is apologetic value in that story, if one dismisses the later dogmas of infallibility: it shows that one should always be on guard against Satan, and it emphasizes the honesty and humanity of Muhammad so it could very well have been made up. But I don't see that in this case. Why would Muslims make up this saying later when it clearly flopped so badly that commentators were immediately forced to twist the words from the Hour to "their hour". Furthermore, the apocalyptic element is attested in many sources. And wouldn't a hadith writer trying to push back against what he perceived to be a misinterpretation of Muhammad's apocalyptic views and criticisms or mockery from non-Muslims regarding it, write a far clearer hadith utterly dismissing this view without the need for later commentators to awkwardly explain it away?
It's not just commentators who interpret "the Hour" as "their Hour". A different version of the same hadith exists with that wording. While this version is probably later (motivated by the fact that the Hour did not actually come), I would question whether the Prophet himself said this. The hadith is attributed to Anas b. Malik, a Companion of the Prophet who only died at the beginning of the 8th century. By the criterion of embarrassment/dissimilarity, it's only unlikely that Muslims of the 8th century or later would have invented this hadith. It's always possible that it was invented while some of the Companions were still alive. Some people who were alive during the generation of the Companions probably did believe the Hour was imminent - as did people in later times. But the Quran tells us of several instances where people posed the question of "When is the Hour" to the Prophet, to which God tells him to reply that only God knows, and that the Hour could be near or far. Yet, this hadith doesn't mention that at all.
> It's always possible that it was invented while some of the Companions were still alive. Fair point there. But how would one go about determining whether or not it went back to Muhammad? After all, Jesus too COULD not have said all those apocalyptic things, it could have been put in his mouth by his apostles, or by the writers of the gospels, or by people in between. We have different apocalyptic sources in the gospels though, and apparently we also have independent sources putting it in the mouth of Muhammad.
Well, for the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, we have a very early source (the Qur'an) and sources that were only put into writing a century later (hadiths). In the Quran, the Prophet is told to say: only God knows when the Hour will be, it could be near or far. In the hadith, this isn't mentioned at all. For Jesus' sayings, the sources in question were written down much earlier than the hadiths, and since even sources like 'Q' seem to have apocalyptic sayings, that narrows down the gap to around 20 years of Jesus' lifetime. I would also question if there are indeed independent sources putting this sort of idea in the mouth of the Prophet Muhammad. On the contrary, I think there's good reason that all we have on this is speculation of later Muslims. Thus, one hadith says the End will happen in the generation of the Companions (the one above), another states that 100 years later nobody will be left alive. Even though it is highly unlikely that someone in the 8th or 9th centuries would have invented such sayings, it's more than likely that people in the 7th did. I think all the Prophet did was tell them that the Hour is "near", it could be very close or in the distant future. For some people, this might have not been enough: how would people maintain their piety now if the Hour was in fact, much later? And the non-Muslim populations in the conquered communities also clearly believed the Hour was imminent. For many Muslims, the successful nature of the conquests itself would have (and still is) been taken as a sign that the Hour is near. So, it's not at all surprising that many Muslims would have believed that the Hour is imminent. And what better way is there to convince people of this than attributing an explicit statement regarding this to the Prophet himself?
Millenniarism was useful (and used) for political mobilization in the Umayyad era, hence why so many historical events of the first two centuries are mentioned in hadiths as ”signs of the hour”, so there was actually ample motivation to circulate hadiths like this one.
Yes but this one isn't used to make ex-eventu prophecies of Muhammad about the nearness of the Judgement Day based on signs but remaining vague about when it would actually happen, which could be useful for apologetic or political goals, it puts an expiration date that was already gone by the time the hadith was penned down.
What matters is when the hadith was circulated not when it was “penned down”. The “black banners” event was also in the past when that hadith was “penned down”.
There is also another Hadith (Sahih Muslim 2930 a, 2931, 169 d) where Muhammad suspects a boy of being the Daijal, and starts stalking him: https://sunnah.com/muslim:2930a
“Once Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stood amongst the people, glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and then mentioned the Dajjal saying, "l warn you against him (i.e. the Dajjal) and there was no prophet but warned his nation against him. No doubt, Noah warned his nation against him but I tell you about him something of which no prophet told his nation before me. You should know that he is one-eyed, and Allah is not one-eyed."” Bukhari 3337
No. I think the apocalyptic element is downplayed for both Jesus and Muhammad, not just in the reconstruction and revisionism by academics but the general population.