Ownership of slaves According to sociologist
Rodney Stark, "the fundamental problem facing Muslim theologians vis-à-vis the morality of
slavery" is that Muhammad himself engaged in activities such as purchasing, selling, and owning slaves, and that his followers saw him as the perfect example to emulate. Stark contrasts Islam with
Christianity, writing that Christian theologians wouldn't have been able to "work their way around the biblical acceptance of slavery" if
Jesus had owned slaves, as Muhammad did. Forough Jahanbaksh notes that Muhammad never preached the abolition of slavery as a doctrine, although he did moderate the age-old institution of slavery, which was also accepted and endorsed by the other monotheistic religions,
Christianity and
Judaism, and was a well-established custom of the
pre-Islamic world. According to Murray Gordon, Muhammad saw it "as part of the natural order of things". While Muhammad did improve the condition of slaves, and exhorted his followers to treat them with kindness and compassion, and encouraged freeing of slaves, he still did not completely abolish the practice. Muhammad established a system to encourage
manumission, and several of his companions, including
Abu Bakr and
Uthman ibn Affan, are recorded to have freed thousands of slaves, often purchasing them for this purpose. Many early converts to Islam were the poor and former slaves like
Bilal ibn Rabah al-Habashi.
Treatment of enemies Norman Geisler accuses Muhammad of "mercilessness" towards the Jewish tribes of Medina. Geisler also argues that Muhammad "had no aversion to politically expedient assassinations", "was not indisposed to breaking promises when he found it advantageous" and "engaged in retaliation towards those who mocked him." The
Orientalist William Muir, in assessing Muhammad's character, described him as cruel and faithless in dealing with his enemies.
Jean de Sismondi suggests that Muhammad's successive attacks on powerful Jewish colonies located near Medina in Arabia were due to religious differences between them, and he claimed that he subjected the defeated to punishments that were not typical in other wars. depicting the execution of the Banu Qurayza, from a 19th-century manuscript illustrated by Muhammad Rafi Bazil. Muhammad has been often criticized outside of the Islamic world for his treatment of the Jewish tribes of Medina. After the Qurayẓah were found to be complicit with the enemy during the
Battle of the Trench, the Muslim general
Sa'd ibn Mu'adh ordered the men to be put to death and the women and children to be enslaved. Moreover, Muslims believe that the Prophet did not order the execution of the Jews of Medina, but many Western historians believe that he must have been, at the very least, informed of it. Regardless, "this tragic episode cast a shadow upon the relations between the two communities for many centuries, even though the Jews, a "
People of the Book" [...] generally enjoyed the protection of their lives, property, and religion under Islamic rule and fared better in the Muslim world than in the West." According to Rudi Paret, adverse public opinion was more a point of concern to Muhammad when he had some date palms cut down during a siege, than after this incident. Esposito also argues that in Muhammad's time, traitors were executed and points to similar situations in the Bible.
John Esposito notes that Muhammad’s motivation was primarily political rather than racial or theological, aiming to unify Arabia under Muslim leadership and establish stable governance. Ahmad argues that only the leading members of the tribe were killed. Arafat argued based on accounts by
Malik ibn Anas and
Ibn Hajar that
Ibn Ishaq gathered information from descendants of the Qurayza Jews, who exaggerated the details of the incident. He also maintained that not all adult males were killed but only those who actually fought in the battle, however, William Montgomery Watt described this argument as "not entirely convincing." Rabbi Samuel Rosenblatt has said that Muhammad's policies were not directed exclusively against Jews (referring to his conflicts with Jewish tribes) and that Muhammad was more severe with his
pagan Arab kinsmen.
Muhammad's marriages One of the popular historical criticisms of Muhammad in the West has been his
polygynous marriages. According to American historian John Esposito, the
Semitic cultures in general permitted
polygamy (for example, the practice could be found in biblical and postbiblical
Judaism); it was particularly a common practice among
Arabs, especially among nobles and leaders. Muslims have often pointed out that Muhammad married
Khadija bint Khuwaylid (a widow whose age is estimated to have been 40), when he was 25 years old, and remained
monogamous to her for more than 24 years until she died.
Quran 33:50 states that the limit of four wives did not apply to Muhammad. Muslims have generally responded that the marriages of Muhammad were not conducted to satisfy worldly desires or lusts, but rather they were done for a higher purpose and due to God's command. Medieval
Sufi,
Ibn Arabi, sees Muhammad's relationships with his wives as a proof of his superiority amongst men. John Esposito explains that polygamy served several purposes, such as strengthening political alliances among Arab chiefs and providing protection through marriage to the widows of companions who had died in combat.
Aisha In classical sources,
Aisha was six or seven years old when betrothed to Muhammad, with the marriage being
consummated when she reached the age of nine or ten years old. Some modern sources, however, state her age to be twelve or older. Christian
polemicists and
orientalists attacked what they deemed to be Muhammad's deviant sexuality, for having married an underage girl; early twentieth-century criticisms came from the likes of
Harvey Newcomb and
David Samuel Margoliouth while others were mild, choosing to explain how the "heat of tropics" made "girls of Arabia" mature at an early age. In the late twentieth century, opponents of Islam have used Aisha's age at marriage to criticize Muhammad and to explain the great prevalence of
child marriage in Muslim societies. From mid-20th century, amidst growing concerns of Islamic extremism, as Muslim societies and Islam itself came under renewed scrutiny, pointed criticisms of Aisha's young age at marriage began to be abundant; this has since prompted some Muslim scholars to attempt to contextualize the traditionally accepted age of Aisha with renewed vigor emphasizing on anachronism and the political dimensions of the marriage, often at the expense of historical accuracy. Since the late-twentieth century, polemicists have used Aisha's age to accuse Muhammad of
pedophilia and to explain a reported higher prevalence of
child marriage in Muslim societies.
Zaynab bint Jahsh Western criticism has focused especially on the marriage of Muhammad to his first cousin
Zaynab bint Jahsh, the divorced wife of
Zayd ibn Harithah, an ex-slave whom Muhammad had adopted as his son.
Orientalists and critics such as
Edward Sell have criticized the marriage, questioning its motivations and implications, while some like
William St. Clair Tisdall have viewed certain aspects, such as the associated revelation, through a lens of self-interest. According to
Tabari, taken from
Al-Waqidi, Muhammad went in search of Zayd. A curtain covering the doorway had been moved by the wind, revealing Zaynab in her chamber. Zayd subsequently found her unattractive and divorced Zaynab. Watt also places doubt on the story outlined by Al-Waqidi and states that it should be taken with a "grain of salt." According to Watt, Zaynab was either thirty-five or thirty-eight years old at the time and that the story initially outlined by Al-Waqidi in which he detailed Muhammad's incident with Zaynab during the absence of Zayd may have been tampered with in the course of transmission. Siddiqi states: "He [Muhammad] had seen her many times before but he was never attracted to her physical beauty, else he would have married her, instead of insisting on her that she should marry Zaid." In the book "The Wives of the Messenger of Allah" by Muhammad Swaleh Awadh, it is noted that Zaynab married Muhammad during the fifth year of
Hijra in
Dhu al-Qadah. This marriage was unconventional and disapproved by the standards of
pre-Islamic Arabia, due to the prevailing belief that adopted sons were considered as true sons, making marriage to an adopted son's former wife uncommon, even after divorce.
Munafiqs of Medina used the marriage to discredit Muhammad on two fronts, one of double standards as she was his fifth wife, while everyone else was restricted to four, and marrying his adopted son's wife. This was exactly what Muhammad feared and was initially hesitant in marrying her. The Qur'an, however, confirmed that this marriage was valid. Thus Muhammad, confident of his faith in the Qur'an, proceeded to reject the existing Arabic norms. When Zaynab's waiting period from her divorce was complete, Muhammad married her. In reference to this incident, says: Following the revelation of this verse, Muhammad rejected the prevailing Arab customs that prohibited marrying the wives of adopted sons, which was considered
taboo and culturally inappropriate. Thereafter the legal status of
adoption was not recognised under Islam. Zayd reverted to being known by his original name of "Zayd ibn Harithah" instead of "Zayd ibn Muhammad". Watt interprets this event as part of Muhammad’s broader role as a social reformer, aimed at ending the pre-Islamic practice of equating adopted sons with biological ones. He also notes the political significance of the marriage, rejects claims of sensual motivation, and argues that criticism arose more from cultural norms than from actual moral concerns.
Thomas Patrick Hughes (b. 1838) said that the
Hajj represents an expedient compromise between Muhammad's
monotheistic principles and
Arabian paganism.
Islamic scholar Yasir Qadhi stated that while non-Muslims believe Muhammad "adopted certain things from
paganism and then added his own two cents for us", he instead states that Muhammad resurrected the original teachings of the
Islamic prophet Ibrahim, citing an Islamic narrative of a man named
Amr ibn Luhay who
later introduced paganism in Arabia.
Muḥammad ibn ʻAbd Allāh Azraqī mentions the story in his book titled
Kitāb akhbār Makkah.'' During the nineteenth century, as Islam was no longer a political or military threat to Western society, and perceptions of epilepsy changed, the theological and moral associations with epilepsy were removed; epilepsy was now viewed as a medical disorder. in 1872, painted by
Vasily Perov Sprenger attributes
Muhammad's revelations to
epileptic fits or a "
paroxysm of
cataleptic insanity." Modern Western scholars of Islam have rejected the diagnosis of epilepsy. Noth, in the
Encyclopedia of Islam, states that such accusations were a typical feature of medieval European Christian polemic.
Maxime Rodinson says that it is most probable that Muhammad's condition was of the sort that was found in many
mystics rather than epilepsy.
Fazlur Rahman refutes epileptic fits for the following reasons: Muhammad's condition begins with his career at the age of 40; according to the tradition seizures are
invariably associated with the revelation and never occur by itself. Lastly, a sophisticated society like the Meccan or Medinese would have identified epilepsy clearly and definitely. William Montgomery Watt also disagrees with the epilepsy diagnosis, saying that "there are no real grounds for such a view." Elaborating, he says that "epilepsy leads to physical and mental degeneration, and there are no signs of that in Muhammad." He then goes further and states that Muhammad was psychologically sound in general: "he (Muhammad) was clearly in full possession of his faculties to the very end of his life." Watt concludes by stating "It is incredible that a person subject to epilepsy, or hysteria, or even ungovernable fits of emotion, could have been the active leader of military expeditions, or the cool far-seeing guide of a
city-state and a growing religious community; but all this we know Muhammad to have been." Frank R. Freemon (1976) argues that the above reasons given by modern biographers of Muhammad in rejection of epilepsy come from the widespread misconceptions about the various types of epilepsy. drug-induced mental changes such as might occur after eating
plants containing hallucinogenic chemicals,
transient ischemic attacks,
hypoglycemia,
labyrinthitis,
Ménière's disease, or other
inner ear maladies. Freemon concludes that if one were forced to make a diagnosis, psychomotor seizures of
temporal lobe epilepsy would be the most tenable one, although our lack of scientific as well as historical knowledge makes unequivocal decision impossible. Freemon cites evidence supporting and opposing this diagnosis. In the end, Freemon points out that a medical diagnosis should not ignore Muhammad's moral message because it is just as likely, perhaps more likely, for God to communicate with a person in an abnormal state of mind. From a Muslim point of view, Freemon says, Muhammed's mental state at the time of revelation was unique and is not therefore amenable to medical or scientific discourse.
Legacy Some scholars claim that following Muhammad's death, the Muslim community who were joined together by the unity of the faith became "leaderless" and a "haphazard" group. In the absence of established dynastic traditions and political customs, divisions emerged among Muslims. Muhammad did not
compile the Quran into a single text during or his
prophetic tradition during his lifetime; the Quran was compiled into book form during
Uthman's Caliphate, and the
hadith were collected and codified by scholars and companions in the 8th–9th centuries. According to both
Sunni and
Shia Muslims, on his way back from his last pilgrimage to Mecca, Muhammad stopped in a place called
Ghadir Khumm, and appointed his cousin
Ali as his executor of his
last will and his
Wali. The word Wali was interpreted differently by Sunni and Shia Muslims. Shia believes Muhammad explicitly appointed Ali as his
successor at the location. Shia also believe Muhammad's
Ahl al-Bayt, are the trusted collectors and transmitters of Muhammad's
ahadith and trusted interpreters of Quran.
Christophe Jaffrelot argues that this contributed to the formation of a hereditary elite led by Muhammad's family and descendants (the
Ahlul Bayt and
sayyids), followed by his clan (
Banu Hashim) then his tribe, the Quraysh. ==Muhammad's personal motivations==