I learned a lot from Karen Armstrong's portrait of the prophet (not profit!)Muhammad and it gave me a lot of things to consider. The book is definitely written for Western Jews or Christians who may be distrustful of Islam, particularly its relationship with Judaism or Christianity. Armstrong explains the life of Muhammad with particular emphasis on his culture and continuing the line of prophets from Abraham through Jesus. To balance out her views, though, I'd like to read something about Muhammad that came from more of an Islamic perspective and not so focused on making Muhammad understandable to Christians or the West.

She also pulled some beautiful lines from the Quran and from other accounts- I was very moved by some of the accounts of people turning to Islam.

Recommended as an introduction to the prophet, especially if you are curious about Islam and its relationship with the other "Ahl el Kitaab" or People of the Book (Jews/Christians).

সমস্য হচ্ছে আমাদের শুধু ভূল জিনিসটাই শিখানো হয় না ভূল ভাবেও শিখানো হয়। ইতিহাসে ব্যপারটা স্পর্শকাতর, আর সহশ্র বছরের কোন কোন পুরাতন ইতিহাসে তো ডালপালা মেলে, অনেকটা মিথের মতোই হয়ে যায়। ইসলাম নিয়ে যেটা পশ্চিমা সমাজে বেশী লক্ষ্যনীয়, আমদের সমাজেও কম কিসের!

অথেনটিক সোর্স থেকে মোহাম্মদ (স:) এর ধর্মিয়, রাজনৈতিক, ইকোনোমিক, সামাজিক মূল্যবোধ, দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি বর্ননা করেছেন লেখিকা, যেগুলা বলা যায় ওয়েস্টার্ন লেখিকা হিসেবে মোহাম্মদের প্রতি ওয়েস্টার্নদের, সাথে অন্যদের ও বিরুপ দৃষ্টিভঙ্গির প্রতি কড়া জবাব, ইসলামের প্রতি কোন ধরনের এনডোর্সমেন্ট ছাড়াই। উনার ted.com talk এটাই বলে।

নতুন করে অনেক কিছু জানলাম। অথেন্টিসিটির দিক দিয়ে Karen Armstrong নির্ভর যোগ্য, উনার প্রোফাইল তাই বলে।

An ideal introductory biography for Muhammad. Smoothly written, no previous knowledge of that period of Arabic history needed, includes the essential info at a crisp pace.

Karen Armstrong first came to my attention when she participated in a debate with Richard Dawkins, in the Wall Street Journal. She seemed to me to articulate a more complete understanding of religion than Dawkins did, and I’m currently waiting for A Case for Religion by Karen Armstrong to be returned to the library so that I can read it. She has written many books on the history of religion, especially fundamentalism, and also an autobiography, The Spiral Staircase.

Her book on Muhammad is a lovely book, portraying the events of his life in a very human and appealing way. It is meticulously documented, with footnoted sources, several to a page, referring back to the Koran, to the early biographers of Muhammad, or to scholarly commentators.

It portrays an inspired man, at times shy and hesitant, but always intensely devoted to his vision of God. He sometimes seems to waffle between the prevailing mores of vengeful desert tribes and a higher vision of desert hospitality raised to love and social justice. Muhammad, in this portrayal, is often struggling and confused, but always steadfast in trying to understand the will of God, and to lead his community toward a holy purposefulness.

Muhammad’s interactions with Christians and Jews are many and varied. Even though illiterate, he shows an understanding of other traditions, works with them as allies, and among his many wives has a Jewish wife and a Christian wife. In this portrayal, he regards himself as at one with all Abrahamic religion.

Armstrong’s book makes me sympathetic to the prophet and to his purposes, which I would not have expected before I read it. It also makes me deeply suspicious of the contemporary authoritarian interpreters who seem so out of synch with the faithful and conscientious character of the prophet.

In 1991, Karen published a biography of Muhammed, the founder of Islam. In 2006, she published this updated biography, hoping to focus more on his life and teachings that contradict the image of Muslim extremism, so that we Americans could put September 11 behind us and recognize Islam as a religion of peace. I haven’t read the first book, but I definitely enjoyed the second.

This is not the story of Islam or an interpretation of its scriptures. It is just a sympathetic biography of its founder. While Karen gives us both the dirt and the glory, she manages to put Mohammed’s story in its societal setting so that we can grasp his original teachings and decisions.

Mohammed’s laws, for example, were designed for a small, struggling community, never for the vast empire that succeeded him. His jihad, which does not mean “holy war” but which means “struggle,” was a tireless campaign against greed, injustice, and arrogance.

Arabs in Mohammed’s time did not feel it was necessary to convert to Judaism or Christianity, because they believed that they were already members of the Abrahamic family. In fact, the idea of conversion from one faith to another was alien. Pluralism was the more natural belief, and Muhammed embraced pluralism. A verse often quoted to prove Islamic exclusive beliefs actually means just the opposite:

“For if one goes in search of a religion other than islam unto God, it will never be accepted from him, and in the life to come, he shall be among the lost.”

Of course, Muhammed did not call his religion “islam”; the word simply meant self-surrender, and had nothing to do with a particular denomination or belief. In its original context, the teaching meant just the opposite of exclusivism. Muhammed hated sectarian quarrels, and was offended by the idea of a “chosen people.”

But Muhammed did believe reform was necessary. He despised the suppression of Arab women, and he could not condone any caste which separated those with money from those without. He personally gave a large percentage of his earnings to the poor, and expected the same selflessness from his little band of followers. All such kindnesses would be rewarded in paradise, he promised.

Does that mean the stories of Muhammed’s wars and raiding expeditions are rumors? No, and here Karen shows a little too much sympathy, as she explains the cultural expectations. A clan could hardly support itself without raiding, she explains! Stories of Muhammed’s harem are juicy as well. Nevertheless, this appears to be an honest portrait of a complex man who tried mightily to reform his little area of the world for the better. Highly recommended.

this is must read book for any non muslims who wants to know more about our beloved [rp[jet
but i would say this book is very short work for any one who wants to to know prophet muhammad

I expected this book to be readable, interesting and wrong and I was not disappointed. Armstrong views Islam through a hopeful Western lens and scrapes together any vaguely plausible benevolent explanation she can. Trawls through the Koran to find every approximately inclusive verse, blazes it in heavy neon and ignores the truly blood-curdling. Gilds every rose, blunts every thorn and forgets the weeds altogether. Aisha? Oh, everyone married six-year-olds in those days. Satanic Verses? Mohammed was just trying to be inclusive, bless him. Personally beheading Jewish prisoners? Crickets. It seems Armstrong is a deeply spiritual person who bent her brain every which way trying to understand the contradictions in her Christian faith and some point it cracked and she fell under the spell of the undeniably elegant simplicity of Islam. Now she is a shill of the most pernicious kind - telling people eager for reassurance just what they want to hear, sprinkling sleepy love dust over a blade in the shadows and whispering to us that it isn't really there. Muhammad is one of the most fascinating tangles of human paradox in history. His story and the rise of Islam is one of world's most breathtaking and urgent. To veil the mystery in anachronistic Western cliches is just a waste. One day someone will write a decent Western book on Islam - not the hysterical right-wing screeds, and not this useless pile of rose petals. Islam does not mean peace, it means submission. Jihad does not mean struggle, it means war. At least that's what the early Muslims tell us, any many today still do. Muhammad was washed up at forty, then released an idea so devastating it swept away the classical world. The superpower Empires of Rome and Persia were not crushed by a previously novelty rabble of flim-flam tribes for no reason. That story is far richer and deeper and deserves to be told with truth and clarity. This book has all the intellectual credibility of a pamphlet thrust into your hands by a glazed-eyed preacher. Consign it to the bin likewise.

That's really a great book, very worth reading. In my hometown, when Islam is being taught, it is always about its people rather than about the environment, traditions, culture, morals and beliefs of fhe people back then where Islam was first revealed. Nothing mentioned about the values, the politics, the economic state and the behavior analysis of the people then is mentioned. Knowing that helps so much with understanding why Islam was delivered that way and in that order.

I absolutely loved this book! And I so much loved the language, the writing style, the terminologies used and their explanation along with the artistic way this biography was conducted. Very objective too!
First time to read for Karen Armstrong and it was very satisfying!

I love this book, It was fair enough to the life of the Prophet (pbuh) also the sequence of events was successful along with the political analyzes behind each action without neglecting the spiritual and divine side.
I would highly recommend.
Thank you Karen !

الكتاب يختصر سيرة رسول الله محمد (صلعم) بعرضه أهم الاحداث و المنعطفات التي غيرت مجرى تاريخ العهد النبوي... من خلال هذا العرض، بحثت الكاتبة اشكاليات الحرب و السلام من وجهة نظر الاسلام، المرأة في الدين الاسلامي و غيرها من المواضيع الجدلية
تتميز الكاتبة بآرائها المحايدة المدعمة بثقافة واسعة و اطلاع كبير على الثقافة العربية

Karen Armstrong es una ex monja católica y, desde los años 80, autora de libros cuyo fin, podría argumentarse, es favorecer la comprensión y el diálogo entre las distintas religiones.

El programa de Armstrong, que podría decirse universalista, considera ante todo los rasgos comunes de las distintas tradiciones religiosas. Cuando uno se pone a analizar, aparentemente, hay un acuerdo generalizado en torno a lo esencial –reglas éticas, valores, percepciones sobre la divinidad- y solo en los aspectos más mundanos de la religión emerge la diferencia. Si todos podemos ponernos de acuerdo en estos puntos fundamentales, dice Armstrong, podremos coexistir en forma más armoniosa, y sin necesidad de dejar de lado nuestras creencias particulares, localistas.

Según creo, hubo ensayos previos en esta misma línea; véanse las 900 tesis de Pico della Mirandola, o la prédica del profeta Bahá'u'lláh. Incluso podría argumentarse que el Islam fue, en sus orígenes, una propuesta universalista (Mahoma dice en uno de los Hadith que todos los niños nacen musulmanes, y solo la crianza los vuelve cristianos, judíos, ateos...).

¿Cómo es que tales intentos nunca prosperaron, siendo tan sensatos? Desde el vamos, porque no hay NADA, absolutamente, sobre lo que todos los seres humanos nos podamos poner de acuerdo, mucho menos sobre la naturaleza (o incluso la existencia) de Dios.

El primer obstáculo, y obvio, es que una abstracción que pudiera contener a todos no dejaría satisfecho a nadie. Digamos, por ejemplo, que acordamos en equiparar a Dios con el instinto de trascendencia de nuestra especie: bueno, los creyentes dirían que “eso no es Dios”, porque para ellos Dios es un ente personal, con inteligencia e intereses, y los ateos dirían básicamente lo mismo y por las mismas razones.

Además, habría que negar que el primer instinto de los seres humanos no es precisamente la concordia, sino más bien el contrario. No nos gustan las bases comunes, nos gustan los detalles, porque son los que nos permiten identificarnos con otros seres humanos, y al mismo tiempo diferenciarnos de la gran mayoría. Tengo mis dudas de que los católicos y los protestantes en Irlanda estuviesen muy enterados de la doctrina de la transustanciación: esa, o cualquier otra, les hubiera venido bien para saberse parte de una comunidad, y para salir a matar a quienes no compartieran ese signo de pertenencia.

Esto en cuanto a la generalidad del programa de Armstrong, que ya nos permite anticipar todo lo necesario sobre su intento de aggiornar a Mahoma. Lo probablemente más grave es que la biografía que presenta, en su afán de ser universal, es muy poco fiel a los hechos. Para fuentes tenemos las Hadith, relatos sobre la vida del Profeta que en el Islam tienen un estatus semisagrado y sirven como base de jurisprudencia, y en ellos vemos a un Mahoma autocrático, intolerante, por momentos arbitrario, capaz de llevar a cabo matanzas y de ordenar asesinatos políticos. Todo esto, se dirá, es lo que corresponde a su entorno brutal, al siglo VII y a las tribus árabes. Y es verdad, pero precisamente por eso Mahoma no es, como Armstrong titula su libro, un profeta para nuestros tiempos.

Esta tensión entre lo que la autora puede decir y lo que le gustaría decir permea todo el libro. Que el Profeta del Islam fue un hombre extraordinario nadie lo pone en duda. Fue incluso capaz de grandes obras, de ideas muy avanzadas para su época (por ejemplo, con respecto al lugar de las mujeres), pero ninguna de estas ideas puede tener vigencia para nosotros, hoy en día. Cuando Mahoma se casó con Aisha, la favorita de sus esposas, él tenía 50 años y ella 6 (y solo tres más, según la tradición, cuando se consumó el matrimonio). Una práctica habitual entonces, perfectamente admisible para la moral de la época, pero que hoy nos parece aberrante. ¿Podemos acusar a Mahoma de no anticiparse a nuestra manera de ver el mundo? No si lo juzgamos meramente como un hombre; la cuestión es que, para el Islam, el Profeta fue el ser humano más perfecto que haya existido, y como tal, un modelo de conducta para los fieles de todas las épocas. Es decir, el matrimonio con una menor de edad no solo no es censurable, sino que está bien, y está bien porque Mahoma lo llevó a cabo.

Es claro que, por los tiempos que corren, es importante contar con miradas más profundas y tolerantes acerca del Islam y sus orígenes; pero el ideal tendría que ser mostrarnos a un Mahoma comprensible en sus propios términos, no uno universalmente válido, como el que Karen Armstrong pretende sacar de la galera.

This is a great read for those who like the informative and dense style of Armstrong’s writing, and for those who prefer easy reading novels this is a lot to slog through. We have women on both sides of this fence. Some of our Muslim members said they had never seen Muhammad through the eyes of a non-Muslim and that this was a whole new and helpful, even if a bit startling at first, perspective on the Prophet. The book prompted a full-bodied discussion and we would highly recommend it for those who want to learn about Islam from a non-Muslim writer.

A biography of Muhammad which takes into account the historical and cultural contexts of his time. Excellent discussion and great introduction to Muhammad; book does not address how Muslims view their prophet.(Merrimack Valley)