Review of “Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography” by Ali Sina

For those who are familiar with the extremist Islamophobic website called “Faithfreedom International”, the name of its founder Ali Sina (a pseudonym) is synonymous with the bigotry and vile rhetoric often displayed against Muslims and Islam. This was a person who openly advocated for the atomic bomb to be used on Muslim populations and have many times declared that he will “wipe out” Islam within 30 years. Now this relatively unknown figure within academic circles — apart from becoming the self-appointed hero for the cause of Islamophobia, bigotry and the new emerging school of lay-people and pseudo-scholars — has moved beyond the world that he is more accustomed with on the internet. Like his predecessors, such as the infamous Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, Ali Sina is now attempting to make his name within the world of published authors with the publication of his book Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography. Whilst it is true that over the course of years he has gathered a large following of largely misled haters, Ali Sina still has had to resort to self-publishing with a relatively small publishing press where anyone with anything to rant about can publish their own.

The book claims to be a “psychobiography” of the Prophet Muhammad, upon whom be peace, but it is far from being objective and sane in its purported “scholarship”. It claims to refer to the Islamic religious texts (heavily relying on translations and not the original Arabic sources which betrays the author’s lack of command in the language) and then attempts to characterize Muhammad (SAWS) in “modern analytical terms”. Coming from a Shi’ite background in predominantly Shi’ite Iran, it is not clear from the onset as to why Ali Sina favours referencing the Sunni sources such as the hadith collection of Bukhari and Muslim (which is not used by the Shi’a and largely unfamiliar to them) and hardly mentions the Shi’ite sources themselves which talks about the Prophet (SAWS). This leads us to suspect that he may not have the credentials of an Iranian Muslim as he claims to have. Unfortunately, this book does nothing more than to resort to the old underhanded technique of cherry-picking a handful of half-truths, sprinkling them with lies, exaggerations and misrepresentations, and eventually to come up with a twisted mix of politically-motivated propaganda.

While Ali Sina believes that his agenda will liberate Muslims, common sense would tell you that Ali Sina’s book comes nowhere close to it. In fact, he is much more likely to lend credence to the grumblings of right-wing nutjobs who want to stoke fear and hatred. The quality of Ali Sina’s “different” pseudo-scholarship is thus displayed by the revival of a long-abandoned polemic against the historical character of the Prophet of Islam – namely, the issue of epilepsy. Nuanced scholars such as the Swedish academic Tor Andrae and prolific writer Karen Armstrong have long dismissed the idea of epilepsy as nonsense. It seems that Ali Sina believes that such studies regarding the Prophet (SAWS) in historiography should be abandoned and instead we should return to Orientalists such as Margoliouth, Muir and other Christian missionaries who would have us believe that the Prophet (SAWS) was epileptic. Ali Sina consistently maligns the Prophet (SAWS) as delusional – while at the same time ignoring that the coherence, completeness and success of Islam in its 1400 years of history show that it cannot be the product of a madman’s mind, nor of that of an epileptic. Ali Sina then calls him (SAWS) a liar (an all too familiar accusation), conveniently ignoring how much he suffered for twenty years before gaining the upper hand and even then he had lived as a poor man with no luxuries. The inconsistencies of Ali Sina’s accusations against the Prophet (P) are themselves testament to the foolishness of his reasoning.

Ali Sina clearly ignores several facts contained within the Sirah itself; that the Prophet (P) spared the Meccans who had tortured and killed his followers for two decades even after conquering them, that he spared all the hypocrites in Madinah undermining his authority (something the man Sina describes would not tolerate), that he had all too often freed prisoners of war freed for no material gain, that he explicitly forbade harming innocent civilians such as women, children, elderly and monks; that he always honoured his treaties even if they were extremely unfair to him (until the disbelievers broke them), that his stories are filled with instances where he spared men who were out to kill him, that as soon as someone became Muslim, he forgave all their past evils, betrayals and murders. The only people that the Prophet (SAWS) was harsh with were with those who were treacherous and betrayed their pacts to turn on the Muslims in order to destroy them in their weakest moment – which is considered as high treason in times of war. Ali Sina deviously omits the context and interpreted such acts as something that the Prophet (SAWS) habitually does, which is nothing short of deception to his readers.

Perhaps we should not be surprised at his attempts of ad hominem and poisoning of the well; after all, Ali Sina’s methodology is consistent with his use of “weak Hadiths”, saying of the Prophet (SAWS) that are not accepted by Muslims or are seen as weak souces for the religion. Further, this short list of verses from the Holy Qur’an shows Islam in different light and contradicts the conclusions made by Ali Sina:

“There is no compulsion in religion, for the right way is clearly from the wrong way. Whoever therefore rejects the forces of evil and believes in God, he has taken hold of a support most unfailing, which shall never give way, for God is All Hearing and Knowing.”¹

“And so (O Prophet!), exhort them your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.” ²

“Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.” ³

The only people who would “love” this book are either psychologically demented — similar to Ali Sina himself — disaffected Muslims who have been hurt in the past and want to blame someone for their problems, or they are extremist Hindus and right-wing Christians who would like nothing better than to rationalize their extremist racism and xenophobic hatred with spurious scholarship. Muhammad on the other hand did not witness any insurrections or attempts on his life at the hands of his own followers. Not even after his death did anyone attempt to assassinate his memory or desecrate his grave. Instead, the Prophet’s (SAWS) example spawned an empire that ruled over the Middle East for one thousand years and witnessed a revival of culture and learning the likes of which was not seen in the West until the Age of Enlightenment.

In summarizing this tiresome work, “Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography” is not a biography at all, much less a “psychobiography”, of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) but a pathetic attempt at character assassination and the rehashing of age-old polemics dating as far as the earliest days of Orientalism. In fact, the author’s methodology is consistent with what that is found on his website and other atheist websites online. It is simply bad history and even worse psychology by a man who can claim to be neither a historian nor a psychologist. He simply repeats the lying polemics of Serge Trikovic, Robert Spencer, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and other atheists who have an axe to grind against Islam. When bigots and extremists approach any text, be it the Turner Diaries, the Bible, the Qur’an, Nietzche or the Sirah literature, they cannot be divorced from contextual hermeneutics. The reason why Ali Sina views the Prophet Muhammd (SAWS) in such light is simply a case of trying to find a demon through the nitpicking of isolated incidents. Indeed, if one were to play with such rhetoric, one could find justification for the Holocaust, even within the New Testament as Hitler did.

We have simply come to the conclusion that a brief psycho-analysis of Ali Sina will determine that he is simply a bigoted, disaffected former Muslim who is no doubt working out issues with his painful upbringing at the hands of puritanical parents, cruel Islamic clergyman or perhaps a child-molesting Iranian mullah (or whatever the thorn in his side may be), as in his book he has focused all his rage into painting the most ugly portrait of the Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) that can ever be conceived by the most insane mind.

1. Qur’an, 2:256
2. Qur’an, 88:21,22; also see Qur’an 24:54
3. Qur’an, 60:8

This is an old issue but I feel that this audio lecture is still worth putting up as it not only refutes the Pope but also anyone who have the tendency to malign the Prophet (P). For a background of the attack by the Catholic Pope Benedict XVI on the Khatamul Nabiy, Muhammad al-Mustafa, see this article repudiating the Pope for it.

This audio lecture is a response by Imam Zaid Shakir in a Friday khutbah in response to the allegations made by the Pope.

In any case, I certainly aim to renew my vow to keep to the main theme of Ittaqullah!, which is to “provide posts for the Muslims to benefit from and strengthen their faith in this beautiful deen“, as Allah SWT wills it, insha’allah.

Like the phoenix, Ittaqullah! is reborn from the ashes.

[See post to listen to audio]

A blinding flash of white light
Lit up the sky over Gaza tonight
People running for cover
Not knowing whether they’re dead or alive

They came with their tanks and their planes
With ravaging fiery flames
And nothing remains
Just a voice rising up in the smoky haze

We will not go down
In the night, without a fight
You can burn up our mosques and our homes and our schools
But our spirit will never die
We will not go down
In Gaza tonight

Women and children alike
Murdered and massacred night after night
While the so-called leaders of countries afar
Debated on who’s wrong or right

But their powerless words were in vain
And the bombs fell down like acid rain
But through the tears and the blood and the pain
You can still hear that voice through the smoky haze

We will not go down
In the night, without a fight
You can burn up our mosques and our homes and our schools
But our spirit will never die
We will not go down
In Gaza tonight

Turkey’s parliament has approved a constitutional amendment that would ease the ban on women wearing Islamic headscarves in universities.

Headscarves were banned from campuses after pressure from the staunchly secularist military ousted a government seen as too Islamist in 1997.

Wednesday’s vote was carried by 397 in favour to 113 against. Final approval is expected in a vote on Saturday.

The Islamist-rooted AK Party has a safe majority in the Turkish parliament.

It is very good news indeed and alhamdulillah, I am very happy with this outcome. It will not be long before the scourge of Kemalism is wiped out from the annals of Turkish history. We hope that this vision will come sooner rather than later.

Vandals damaged or destroyed dozens of graves belonging to Muslims in the Austrian city of Graz, heightening tensions in the southern city where a local politician made disparaging comments about Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Police in Graz, about 200 kilometers (120 miles) south of Vienna, said about 60 gravestones belonging to Muslims were found overturned or broken in the central cemetery, but said it was unclear when the vandalism took place.

Officials said they could not rule out the possibility that extreme-right groups active in the city may have been behind the attack.

Tensions have risen in Graz since a local female politician from the right-wing Freedom Party disparaged the Prophet Muhammad, calling him a “child molester” who wrote the Quran during “fits of epilepsy.”

Many Muslims stayed away from recent protests organized in Graz to support Palestinians suffering under a punishing Israeli blockade, fearing tensions could spill over into violence so soon after the comments by Freedom Party (FP) politician Susanne Winter, Austrian newspaper Wiener Zeitung said on Jan. 26.

This is how Christians will behave when they are in power.

12.03pm: Abdul Aziz allows substantive appeal by wife and also allows injunction except confirmation of conversion. But injunction applies in re husband seeking ancillary relief.

11.59am: High Court could and should have granted injunction against Syariah court to stop abuse of process and undermining divorce petition under section 51 of the 1976 Act. While conversion of child is valid injunction should be granted to stop conversion until objection by wife is heard and it is granted.

11.52am: Aziz FCJ said his judgment 110 pages long and so he is going to summarise it. Question of date of husband’s conversion needs to be tried. High Court has exclusive jurisdiction over civil marriage even though husband has converted. It’s abuse of process to file custody proceedings in Syariah courts in re civil marriage as those courts have no jurisdiction.

11.45am: Conversion of eldest son valid. Not abuse of process. Wife’s appeal dismissed with costs. Datuk Abdul Aziz’s judgment being read now.

11.37am: Nik Hashim FCJ hold that (interpreting section5 Guardianship of Infants Act 1961) in converting a child to another religion, only 1 parent is necessary. On Erinford injunction, he holds that the High Court ’s decision to grant the injunction pending appeal to the Court of Appeal is correct. He felt, notwithstanding the argument of the husband’s counsel that the court’s very jurisdiction is being questioned, Erinford can still be granted to retain status quo of parties in this case.

11.32am: Non-Muslim marriage which is dissolved by Syariah court has no legal effect to the marriage in civil court unless it is dissolved by civil courts. Contention that wife may submit to Syariah court is wrong. As non-Muslim she has no locus in Syariah court. But Syariah courts are of equal standing with civil courts under Constitution and they are not inferior courts.

11.28am: Husband cannot shield behind freedom of religion under Article 11 and civil court still has jurisdiction under the 1976 Act. But not abuse of process if husband seeks remedies in Syariah court.

11.21am: Wife to file divorce petition afresh and to ask for ancillary relief. But assuming wife’s petition was filed correctly, the High Court has jurisdiction to hear matter even if husband had converted and filed in syariah. Tan Sung Mooi referred. Section 51(1) does not violate Article 8 of the Federal Constitution. Converting party is respondent. Status of marriage at time it was converted is relevant and material period.

11.18am: Nik Hashim FCJ: Lack of jurisdiction issue not a bar to granting of injunction in civil court. Divorce for petition must only be filed 3 months after date of conversion. It is mandatory provision. Wife filed divorce prematurely and in contravention of section 51 Law Reform Marriage Act 1976 provision. Divorce petition invalid. Judgment still being read.

11.10am: Haris Ibrahim, Shanmuga Kanesalingam and Richard Wee for wife. Nubashur, Zanul Rijal for husband. Meera for women’s groups. Joy for MCCBCHST. Mohd Aznil for Abim. Tajuddin for Persatuan Peguam Syariah. Edmund Bon for the Bar Council. Datuk Nik Hashim FCJ chairing. Reading his judgment now.

PUTRAJAYA, Thurs – 10.59am: The three judges who will deliver decision are Datuk Nik Hashim, Datuk Azmel and Datuk Abdul Aziz.

Never forget what happened to the Babri Mosque.

ABIM notes with deep concern that some of the actions and contents of various documents issued by HINDRAF, in substance and wordings constitute extreme, exagerated and sensationalised allegations implicating the Muslim community in one way or another. The use of terms and expressions such as “ethnic cleansing”, “permanent colonization” of Indian Malaysians by ” Islamic extremists” “Malay gangs” and the like is clearly racially and religiously unjustified, seditious and borders on the subversive.

However, we believe that this should not be the basis for any unwarranted reactions from the Muslim community. We believe that although there may be grievances amongst the Indian community, the majority of our peace-loving Indian friends and mainstream Hindu organizations do not harbor ill will or undue enmity against the Muslims and are also not agreeable to the manner, style and approach erstwhile adopted by HINDRAF. We would also like to reaffirm our solidarity with the poor and marginalized amongst the Indian community and other races in this country and urge the government and all parties to undertake continuous effort to improve their livelihood.

Let us all be reminded that issues involving racial and religious interests in our multi-communal society are very delicate, sensitive and potentially explosive. Those who are fighting for racial and religious interests should learn from our past history that such issues, if not carefully handled, may cause tensions to flare up. When emotions are left unchecked and the communal temperature is too high, there’s no guarantee that public order and safety can be maintained.

ABIM condemns all forms of racial and and religious extremism and urges peace-loving Malaysians not to take actions that may jeopardize peace, harmony, public order and safety in the country. Although the freedom of assembly and expression are recognised fundamental rights under our Constitution and should generally be exercisable by all citizens, the relevant authorities should be allowed to regulate the exercise of such rights taking into account the circumstances of each case. At the same time we urge the police to observe due restraint and be reasonable in exercising their discretion in handling the situation. We also believe that the current situation is such that it is very irresponsible and dangerous for anyone to manipulate this issue to fan racial sentiments for any political or ulterior agendas.

YUSRI MOHAMAD
President