Did Muhammad Exist?

How do we know that Muhammad really existed? Because of all the historians that reported him in their books that are recorded. So lets go to these sources one by one. Years are given in common era.

Urwah ibn Zubayr (d.712): Son of Asma bint Abi Bakr and Zubair ibn alAwwam. He wrote a biography of Muhammad which he subsequently destroyed after the Battle of Harrah. How do we know all this? Through ibn Khallikan (d.1282) and ibn Hajar alAsqalani (d.1449). (Comment: This is not acceptable based on common sense.)

Aban bin Uthman bin Affan (d.723): Son of the Umm Amr bint Jandab and the 3rd Caliph Uthman. He wrote the Maghazi of Muhammad. How do we know that? Why its our good old friend ibn Hajar alAsqalani (d.1449). (Comment: This is not acceptable.)

 Wahb ibn Munabbih (d. 725-737): Son of Munabbih ibn Kamil. He wrote Qisas alAnbiya. How do we know that? That’s right, our man ibn Khallikan (d.1282) and ibn Hajar alAsqalani. (Comment: Really, again, another guy not acceptable. His death must be painful or the writers just couldn’t make up their mind.)

ibn Shihab alZuhri (d.741-2): Wrote the Sira of Muhammad. How do we know that? Well now we can rely on someone different this time, namely ibn Sa’d (d.845). (Comment: I don’t find it acceptable.)

ibn Ishaq (d.770): He never wrote the Sira of Muhammad rather his student alBakkai who committed to writing what he had learnt from ibn Ishaq but later ibn Hisham edited the work of alBakkai, more on that below. (So another iffy writer.)

Malik bin Anas (d.795): He wrote alMuwatta which is still in circulation. [Note from this point onwards we have the books of the authors]

Hisham Ibn Al-Kalbi (d.819): He established that Muhammad was from the children of Ishmael and subsequently all the Arabs are the children of Ishmael.

alWaqidi (d. 823): He wrote Kitab alTarikh wa alMaghazi.

Ibn Hisham (d. 835): He wrote the Sira of Muhammad which was actually just an editing od alBakkai’s work. This work survives.

Ibn Sa’d al-Baghdadi (d.845):  He wrote Kitab Tabaqat alKubra which contains material on Muhammad and his companions. This work has survived.

Khalifah ibn Khayyat (d.854): There are only two works of his that survive, one is Tabaqat and the other is Tarikh, an 11th century copy was discovered in Rabat, Morroco. He was also the teacher of Bukhari and Ahmad ibn Hanbal.

Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 855): He wrote the famous Musnad.

alDarimi (d. 869): He wrote the Sunan alDarimi.

Muhammad alBukhari (d. 870): He wrote Sahih alBukhari, part of Kutub alSittah.

Muslim ibn alHajjaj (d.875): He wrote Sahih Muslim, part of Kutub alSittah.

ibn Majah (d. 887-9): He wrote Sunan ibn Majah, part of Kutub alSittah.

Abu Dawood (d. 889): He wrote Sunan Abu Dawood, part of Kutub alSittah.

Muhammad ibn Isa at-Tirmidhi (d.892): He wrote Jami alTirmidhi, part of Kutub alSittah, amongst other works.

anNasa’i (d.915): He wrote asSunan asSughra, part of Kutub alSittah.

Conclusion: One must bear in mind that Muhammad died in the year 632 of common era and the first three people on the list above were claimed to be historians by people in the 13th century and later. No one who witnessed Muhammad wrote about Muhammad. The fact of the matter is that generally there are 3-7 people in the transmitters of any tradition. Lets keep in mind that this is the time when most people had very low education, infact most people had no education and they believed some of the most laughable things like 360 angels carrying the moon and the sun everyday.

One more thing that needs to be said about this is the fact that the Muslim calender starts right about when the Persian-Byzantine war came to an end with the victory of Byzantine. At that point both the empires were tired making them easy pickings by the two large local factions which were Lakhmid and Ghassanid. Islam will only make sense when historians pay a closer attention to the two Arab tribes.


Fixed Standard or Felxible Standard

I find having absolute standard has benefits and also drawbacks. One major advantage is the fact that I know exactly what I have to do and this allows me the freedom to not have to think what is the right thing to do in this situation or in that situation. An example is appropriate here, lying, hurting, stealing stc are all wrong. However fixed standard comes crasing in real world. There are good people who do bad things and bad people who do good things and people do bad things in certain situation but would never do bad things in other situations. Again I guess an example would make more sense. A salesperson might lie in order to sell but the same person might never think of lying to their partner. In order to complete an example is the cruel dictator who is loving to the little kids he might see in a school.

Well that brings me to the other side of the coin, flexibel standard. The idea here is to change your behaviour that suits the situation, I must assert that I am not saying that we should become morally flexible, but rather to make the appropriate decision after understanding the situation ion which you are making decision. While having a felxible standard for yourself you can feel the satisfaction that the decision you make are appropriate for the situation however this requires time and information which might both be lacking in the situation.

So how do you decide what to do? {I forgot what I was going to type. Ah yes} The way to make the right decision is to follow the fixed standard that you have determined, however make sure to allow yourself the room to be able to observe the results and only be flexible if you know the situation in detail.

To some it up, if you have little information and you have to make a decision on that then stick to the fixed standard you have however if you have information and/or you have a reasonable assurance that more information will come by then wait for that information in order to make the fianl decision. {Its clear I am out of my depth here.}


Projection is perception. The title may make some mad.

Reading several blogposts by self-appointed saviours of other women I came accross a blog that started out good only to end in recomendations that would totally reverse the civilisation.

1. Innocent Until Proven Guilty

It’s not relevant outside of court of law.

People do things, and it is the community’s responsibility to hold members accountable for their actions and to protect themselves and their members from harm and to support those in need. That’s what a community is for.

Make them [accused] respond to accusations instead of making the victims hide in shame.

There is a fallacy that these self-appointed social justice warriors (or Social Justice Stormtroopers) have not looked into. They believe that rights come from the government, that rights are a privileges granted to you from above. This kind of reasoning leads to tyranny. Two things that the author clearly didn’t realise while writing, the writer talks about how innocnet until proven guilty is something that is only valid when inside the court and outside the court you can do the reverse, followed by demanding that the community enforce the punishment based on accusation. if the job of enforcing punishment goes to the community instead of a competent court you are asking for a mob-rule, call it whatever you want. The author’s reasoning is counter to the common understanding held by people and legal experts and that is that all our rights come from our humanity. According to the UN charter innocent until proven guilty is a human right.

3. No to Vigilante Justice

Again. We’re not talking about criminal cases here. We’re talking about social responsibility.

I don’t even want to go on what the social responsibility is, but a rape is a criminal case where the duty is to report it to the authorities and the duty of the people is to not jump to conclusions on the event but rather to provide her with any justified assistance to the victim, don’t let the case get contaminated by emotions of vindictivness. As a side there is a thing called the bond-vigilantes who are not wearing spandex doing their job.

5. Ruining a person’s life

Rape does ruin the life of a woman and we as society individuals need to have a debate about how best to provide the highest quality of couselling and legal service that will help the victims of rape get back on life and gwt the highest quality of justice. I can’t say much about rapists having an easy life and if the justice system is broken then as a society an individual we need to identify the specific areas and find a solution that is ethical and fix it as soon as possible.

6. People will just “cry rape” willy nilly

Under this heading the writer has made it clear that they are not interested in making a society a better place for all but rather because they are living in fear that everyone deserves to live in fear. This is mean-spirited and sadistic.

7. Right to privacy

Your privacy in society is a privilege, not a right. That privilege can be taken away when you violate others’ rights, like by raping someone or by posting pictures of underage girls as “fop” material on Reddit. It is, by the way, an inalienable right to not be raped. Each of us OWNS our body. It’s ours, and it can only be entered with given and maintained consent. Period.

Privacy according to the US constitution is argued to be not a right and Late Antonin Scalia explains. However an individual can lose their right if there is evidence that a person has commited a crime and then they do lose rights either as part of investigation to be done by competent people or as punishment.

There was one feeling that I consistently felt through out reading the literature of the Feminist-Marxists and it was hoe morally bankrupt their arguments are at the heart of it. Farxists are so wrong wrong in their reasoning that they don’t realise how far removed they have descended downwards from the moral high ground. The second thing I began to understand is how convoluted their understanding of the Law is. I will have to write more on this.

By the way just because someone is a victim of a crime does not make them an expert in the crime.