Muhammad (Past Masters)

Rating:
Summary: The best short book on this subject that I have seen
Review: I have been a serious student of the history of western religions for 5 or 6 years, with emphasis on the beginnings and early years of Christianity in the context of the cultures, philosophies and religions of the time (Jewish, Greek, Roman, Persian etc.), and the subsequent development of the 6th-7th century world in which Islam arose and flourished. I have accumulated a sizable reference collection and thought I hadn't missed very much. But I just ran across Michael Cook's 'Muhammad', and it is the book I would recommend that any interested beginner read for a short account of Muhammed and the origins of Islam. Only 89 pages, it is especially good on the relationships between Islam and its Arabian cultural roots, and between Islam and Judaism & Christianity. The writing style is so clear and effective that it took my breath away more than once. Other reviewers here criticize it as an apology for Islam, as speculating things that are in dispute, and as not being the best source on this subject. The first says less about this book or about Islam than it does about the reviewer. The second is true but trivial - Cook is clear that he is speculating when he does and it is a strength of this book that he is willing to. From my extensive reading, there is nothing in his speculations that is unreasonable. On the third, there are other good introductory books such as Karen Armstrong's 'History of God' and 'Islam', but this is the best well-written short treatment I have seen. Cook wrote a short, clear book in part by leaving out all the "maybes" and "so-and-so doesn't agree with this theory" verbiage. If you want a longer, every question & detail covered, a struggle to get through, reference-style treatment, well, they're out there. That's not what this is.

Rating:
Summary: The best short book on this subject that I have seen
Review: I have been a serious student of the history of western religions for 5 or 6 years, with emphasis on the beginnings and early years of Christianity in the context of the cultures, philosophies and religions of the time (Jewish, Greek, Roman, Persian etc.), and the subsequent development of the 6th-7th century world in which Islam arose and flourished. I have accumulated a sizable reference collection and thought I hadn't missed very much. But I just ran across Michael Cook's 'Muhammad', and it is the book I would recommend that any interested beginner read for a short account of Muhammed and the origins of Islam. Only 89 pages, it is especially good on the relationships between Islam and its Arabian cultural roots, and between Islam and Judaism & Christianity. The writing style is so clear and effective that it took my breath away more than once. Other reviewers here criticize it as an apology for Islam, as speculating things that are in dispute, and as not being the best source on this subject. The first says less about this book or about Islam than it does about the reviewer. The second is true but trivial - Cook is clear that he is speculating when he does and it is a strength of this book that he is willing to. From my extensive reading, there is nothing in his speculations that is unreasonable. On the third, there are other good introductory books such as Karen Armstrong's 'History of God' and 'Islam', but this is the best well-written short treatment I have seen. Cook wrote a short, clear book in part by leaving out all the "maybes" and "so-and-so doesn't agree with this theory" verbiage. If you want a longer, every question & detail covered, a struggle to get through, reference-style treatment, well, they're out there. That's not what this is.

Rating:
Summary: A Man and His Times
Review: This book is not a biography of Muhammad; the Prophet's life is covered only in Chapter 2. It is rather an account of Muhammad in his historial context, with emphasis on pre-Islamic Arabia, the traditions of monotheism, and the sources for early Islamic history on which it is based.

The main flaw in this book is that it presents as authoritative information which is in reality quite controversial. For example, his chapter on Muhammad's life includes a brief phrase about the satanic verses incident (without calling it that) that fails to describe differing points of view on the subject. The whole chapter on the Prophet's life, and much of the rest of the book, has perhaps also been too much influences by anti-Semitism in the Middle East arising after the founding of Israel. He also reports lots of traditions outside the mainstream (such as Ishmaelite Arabs who followed Jewish law) without giving a clear indication of how they might have fit into the larger scheme of things.

His chapter on "The Sources," while perhaps the most controversial, does give a fair presentation of the dilemma scholars face as to whether the Islamic tradition about the Prophet is fundamentally correct or fundamentally a later invention. I disagree with his conclusion, but it's his book. Here he presents enough of the evidence for interested readers to make up their own minds.

Given the contraints of this series, Cook may have done all he could. This is an interesting work, but there are probably better ones out there.

Rating:
Summary: A Man and His Times
Review: This book is not a biography of Muhammad; the Prophet's life is covered only in Chapter 2. It is rather an account of Muhammad in his historial context, with emphasis on pre-Islamic Arabia, the traditions of monotheism, and the sources for early Islamic history on which it is based.

The main flaw in this book is that it presents as authoritative information which is in reality quite controversial. For example, his chapter on Muhammad's life includes a brief phrase about the satanic verses incident (without calling it that) that fails to describe differing points of view on the subject. The whole chapter on the Prophet's life, and much of the rest of the book, has perhaps also been too much influences by anti-Semitism in the Middle East arising after the founding of Israel. He also reports lots of traditions outside the mainstream (such as Ishmaelite Arabs who followed Jewish law) without giving a clear indication of how they might have fit into the larger scheme of things.

His chapter on "The Sources," while perhaps the most controversial, does give a fair presentation of the dilemma scholars face as to whether the Islamic tradition about the Prophet is fundamentally correct or fundamentally a later invention. I disagree with his conclusion, but it's his book. Here he presents enough of the evidence for interested readers to make up their own minds.

Given the contraints of this series, Cook may have done all he could. This is an interesting work, but there are probably better ones out there.