The Evolution Of God Part 9

According to Muslim tradition, the revelation of the Koran to Muhammad began when he was forty, around the year 609. He was in the habit of retreating to a mountain for contemplation. One night, he had a vision. A glorious being appeared and conveyed a message from Allah along with the instruction to share it. ("Recite!" is the opening command of the sura that according to Muslim tradition is Muhammad's first revelation.) 5 5 Like the biblical Jesus, and like shamans over the ages, Muhammad emerged from seclusion with a mission. In the final two decades of his life he would again and again receive these divine revelations, and he would share them with others-first with a small band of devotees, later with a larger audience. Like the biblical Jesus, and like shamans over the ages, Muhammad emerged from seclusion with a mission. In the final two decades of his life he would again and again receive these divine revelations, and he would share them with others-first with a small band of devotees, later with a larger audience.

The Koran describes the glorious being-the angel Gabriel, apparently-coming within "two bows' length" of Muhammad, after which Gabriel "revealed unto His slave that which He revealed." At this moment, the Koran tells us, Muhammad's "heart lied not (in seeing) what it saw." 6 6 Maybe not, but this is not a question we are in a position to address. A question we Maybe not, but this is not a question we are in a position to address. A question we should should address before proceeding further is: Does the Koran lie in reporting what Muhammad said? Whatever the inspiration for Muhammad's subsequent utterances, is the Koran a reliable guide to them? address before proceeding further is: Does the Koran lie in reporting what Muhammad said? Whatever the inspiration for Muhammad's subsequent utterances, is the Koran a reliable guide to them?

The Koran has a better claim to that status than the gospels have of being a reliable record of Jesus's sayings. Parts of it may have been written down during Muhammad's life, perhaps under his supervision. 7 7 Almost certainly some of it was being written down shortly after his death, and many scholars believe it was essentially complete within twenty years of his death. Almost certainly some of it was being written down shortly after his death, and many scholars believe it was essentially complete within twenty years of his death. 8 8 Of course, twenty years is plenty of time for distortion-even wholesale fabrication-to set in. Still, two factors make a fair degree of fidelity plausible. Of course, twenty years is plenty of time for distortion-even wholesale fabrication-to set in. Still, two factors make a fair degree of fidelity plausible.

First, beginning in Muhammad's day, Koranic verses seem to have been ritually recited in Muslim communities. Second, the Koran is particularly amenable to retention via recitation; in the original Arabic, much of it rhymes, at least loosely, and is rhythmic.

The contours of the Koran also suggest authenticity. By the time of his death, Muhammad had gone from being a monotheistic prophet, preaching in the largely polytheistic city of Mecca, to being the head of an Islamic state with expansionist tendencies. And in the years after his death, the Islamic state expanded rapidly. If the Koran were mainly a post-Muhammad concoction, you would expect it to mainly reflect the needs of the rulers of such a state. 9 9 Yet, as we'll see, most of the Koran consists of the kinds of things you would say not if you were a powerful political leader, but if you were a freelance prophet frozen out of the local power structure. And the smaller fraction of the Koran that seems keyed to the needs of an expanding Islamic state would, for the most part, make sense as the sayings of Muhammad himself in the final years of his career, when he had segued from prophet to statesman. Yet, as we'll see, most of the Koran consists of the kinds of things you would say not if you were a powerful political leader, but if you were a freelance prophet frozen out of the local power structure. And the smaller fraction of the Koran that seems keyed to the needs of an expanding Islamic state would, for the most part, make sense as the sayings of Muhammad himself in the final years of his career, when he had segued from prophet to statesman.

Still, no serious scholar believes that the Koran is wholly reliable as a guide to what Muhammad actually said. 10 10 Indeed, ancient sources outside the Islamic tradition raise the possibility that on one key theme-Muhammad's att.i.tude toward Jews during the final years of his life-the Koran may have been amended, or at least creatively interpreted, after his death. Indeed, ancient sources outside the Islamic tradition raise the possibility that on one key theme-Muhammad's att.i.tude toward Jews during the final years of his life-the Koran may have been amended, or at least creatively interpreted, after his death.

We'll look at this question two chapters from now, when it becomes relevant. But first let's stress the sense in which it doesn't matter. As we'll see, even if one phase in the Koran's shifting att.i.tude toward Jews reflects post-Muhammad amendment, the pattern we've seen in this book so far will stand: tolerance and belligerence, even when conveyed by the lofty language of scripture, are ultimately obedient to the facts on the ground.

Mecca.

In the case of Muhammad, the ground was in Arabia. He lived in the town of Mecca. "Mecca" is today a generic noun-"mecca" -denoting "a center of activity sought as a goal by people sharing a common interest." 11 11 The reason is that Mecca is the destination of Muslim pilgrims every year. But Mecca was something of a mecca even before there were Muslims. In Muhammad's time, it was a trading center, a transit point for goods heading to or from Yemen to the south, Syria to the north, and, perhaps, the Persian Empire to the northeast. The reason is that Mecca is the destination of Muslim pilgrims every year. But Mecca was something of a mecca even before there were Muslims. In Muhammad's time, it was a trading center, a transit point for goods heading to or from Yemen to the south, Syria to the north, and, perhaps, the Persian Empire to the northeast. 12 12 Meccan trade was dominated by a tribe called Kuraysh. Muhammad was born into the Kuraysh, and so wouldn't seem like a person destined to make waves. If your team is already winning, why change the rules?

But the more you know about Muhammad's early life, the more natural it seems that he wound up unsettling things. He wasn't born into a powerful clan within the Kuraysh tribe, and his place within his clan was insecure. He was an orphan. His father died either before or not long after his birth, and his mother died when he was six. His new guardian, a grandfather, died only two years later, and Muhammad pa.s.sed into the care of an uncle.

As a young man, Muhammad married a wealthy woman some fifteen years older, a previously married businesswoman who had been impressed by his commercial savvy. But even then, the system didn't work to his advantage. His wife's surviving offspring were all females, and in Arabia a man's stature seems to have depended partly on the number of sons he had. 13 13 In fact, daughters were sometimes buried alive at birth so that the mother could focus on the important business of producing male offspring. No wonder Muhammad decried this tradition, envisioning in one sura a "girl who hath been buried alive" asking "for what crime she was put to death." In fact, daughters were sometimes buried alive at birth so that the mother could focus on the important business of producing male offspring. No wonder Muhammad decried this tradition, envisioning in one sura a "girl who hath been buried alive" asking "for what crime she was put to death." 14 14 Linking the values in the Koran to Muhammad's personal situation isn't just speculation. The Koran itself makes the link. In one sura G.o.d, speaking about himself in the third person, says to Muhammad, "Did He not find thee an orphan, and shelter thee?... Did He not find thee needy, and suffice thee? As for the orphan, do not oppress him, and as for the beggar, scold him not." Muhammad did as told. He enjoined his followers to live compa.s.sionately and to "enjoin compa.s.sion on others." He said that Allah would smile on "the freeing of a slave, or giving food upon a day of hunger to an orphan near of kin or a needy man in misery." He conveyed Allah's critique of the Meccan ethos: "You honor not the orphan, and you urge not the feeding of the needy, and you devour the inheritance greedily, and you love wealth with an ardent love." 15 15 This isn't the only part of Muhammad's message that was bound to disturb the status quo. Muhammad was a monotheist, and many of the Meccans were polytheists. They believed in deities named Al-'Uzza, Manat, and Al-Lat-as well as a creator G.o.d named Allah. In Muhammad's view, they were mostly wrong.

From the standpoint of high-status Meccan polytheists, if there was one thing worse than someone who denounced the wealthy and preached monotheism, it was someone who did the two synergistically. That was Muhammad. Like Jesus, he was intensely apocalyptic in a left-wing way; he believed that Judgment Day would bring a radical inversion of fortunes. Jesus had said that no rich man would enter the kingdom of heaven. The Koran says that "Whoso chooseth the harvest field of this life" will indeed prosper; "but no portion shall there be for him in the life to come." 16 16 Such parallels between the Bible and the Koran shouldn't surprise us. Muhammad's basic claim was that he was a prophet sent by the G.o.d who had first revealed himself to Abraham and later had spoken through Moses and Jesus. (One slightly ambiguous Koranic verse seems to say that he is the last in this lineage-the "seal of the prophets.") The Koran is full of stories from the Bible and allusions to the Bible, including a monotheistic declaration that seems to come right out of Isaiah: "There is no G.o.d beside me." 17 17 In light of Muhammad's conviction that he spoke for the Abrahamic G.o.d, I'll depart from current convention and refer to Allah as "G.o.d." Of course, many Christians and Jews wouldn't agree that their G.o.d is the G.o.d worshipped by Muslims. Then again, many Jews wouldn't agree that their G.o.d is the G.o.d worshipped by Christians, since (for one thing) their G.o.d never a.s.sumed human form. In calling both the Jewish and Christian G.o.ds "G.o.d," we defer to the claim of Christians that their G.o.d is the same G.o.d who spoke through Moses. It only makes sense to extend that deference to Muhammad's claim that the G.o.d who spoke through him is the same G.o.d who had spoken through Moses and Jesus. Besides, if we look closely at how Muhammad turned Allah into the one true G.o.d of the Arabs, we'll see that Allah's Judeo-Christian lineage is, if anything, stronger than is commonly appreciated.

Making Contact with the G.o.d of Abraham.

How and when did Muhammad decide that the Abrahamic G.o.d was the one and only G.o.d? According to one early oral Muslim tradition, Muhammad's wife had a wise old cousin who was a Christian. When Muhammad had his initial revelation, it was so disorienting -Was he going crazy? Was he demon-possessed?-that he sought guidance from his wife, and she consulted this cousin. 18 18 If indeed Muhammad fleshed out an initially vague religious experience with the help of a Christian, that could explain why he concluded that his mission was to spread a monotheist message, and, more specifically, the message of the Abrahamic G.o.d; especially if, as that early Islamic tradition has it, the Christian in question had long believed that G.o.d would send a prophet to the Arabs-and declared upon hearing of Muhammad's experience, "Verily Muhammad is the Prophet of this people." 19 19 This is the kind of p.r.o.nouncement that could help a seeker with messianic leanings but no clear mission fill in the blanks. This is the kind of p.r.o.nouncement that could help a seeker with messianic leanings but no clear mission fill in the blanks.

Even aside from the Christian cousin-in-law, Muhammad had chances to learn about the Judeo-Christian G.o.d. There may have been pockets of Christians and Jews in the Meccan vicinity, and there was a sizable Christian community in Yemen, one of Mecca's two main trade partners. And the other big trade partner, Syria, was part of the Byzantine Empire and hence heavily Christian. 20 20 Muhammad is said to have traveled to Syria as a boy with his uncle on trade trips. Muhammad is said to have traveled to Syria as a boy with his uncle on trade trips.

He would probably have carried an open att.i.tude toward Syrian religion. Mecca was a polytheistic society that, in cla.s.sic ancient fashion, was tolerant of the G.o.ds of trade partners. In fact, Mecca's famous shrine the Ka'ba-today the destination of the hajj, the annual Islamic pilgrimage-was in pre-Islamic times surrounded by idols of G.o.ds favored by various tribes and clans, and this pluralism seems to have lubricated commerce. According to one early Muslim source, a Christian had been allowed to paint an image of Jesus and the Virgin Mary on an inner wall of the Ka'ba 21 21 -the sort of formalized respect for the beliefs of trade partners that would have been unexceptional in an ancient polytheistic city. -the sort of formalized respect for the beliefs of trade partners that would have been unexceptional in an ancient polytheistic city.

In this case the respect probably went beyond the formal. The Byzantine Empire was more cosmopolitan, more technologically advanced, than Arabian society, and the culture of a powerful neighbor often holds a special fascination to a less developed people. So long as that power isn't viewed as an enemy, the fascination can be alluring.

This leads to one way of looking at Muhammad-as a man who had the ingenuity to fill a wide-open spiritual niche. He took a foreign G.o.d that was already making inroads in Arabia and became that G.o.d's official Arab-language spokesman. To put it in modern commercial terms, it's as if no one before Muhammad had thought to secure Arabic translation rights to the Bible, even though demand for such a book was taking shape.

The Koran itself comes close to saying as much: "Before this, was the Book of Moses.... And this Book [the Koran] confirms (it) in the Arabic tongue." 22 22 However, there's a crucial difference between this line and the Muhammad-as-translator a.n.a.logy. In the translator scenario, Judeo-Christian theology is transmitted to Muhammad by contact with Jews and Christians and/or their scriptures. In the Koran's scenario, Judeo-Christian theology was transmitted to the Jews and Christians by G.o.d and then to Muhammad by G.o.d. When G.o.d, in the Koran, tells Muhammad that he has "made it an Arabic Koran that ye may understand: And it is a transcript of the archetypal Book," 23 23 the archetypal Book isn't the Bible. Rather, the archetypal book is the word of G.o.d-the Logos, as some ancient Christians and Jews would have put it-of which the Bible is equally a "transcript." Muhammad didn't get the Word the archetypal Book isn't the Bible. Rather, the archetypal book is the word of G.o.d-the Logos, as some ancient Christians and Jews would have put it-of which the Bible is equally a "transcript." Muhammad didn't get the Word via via Moses. Rather, like Moses, he had a direct line to G.o.d. Moses. Rather, like Moses, he had a direct line to G.o.d.

So Islam, by its own account, isn't descended descended from other Abrahamic religions, even though it is rooted firmly in the Abrahamic lineage. Yes, Islamic tradition may highlight Muhammad's contact with a Christian relative, but the idea isn't that the relative was an invaluable tutor in Christianity; more important was his role in helping Muhammad see which G.o.d was already doing the tutoring. from other Abrahamic religions, even though it is rooted firmly in the Abrahamic lineage. Yes, Islamic tradition may highlight Muhammad's contact with a Christian relative, but the idea isn't that the relative was an invaluable tutor in Christianity; more important was his role in helping Muhammad see which G.o.d was already doing the tutoring.

This distinction would have been crucial to Muhammad. The way to attract a devoted following in those days was to have special access to the supernatural. Just having access to a cousin-in-law conversant in biblical scripture wouldn't be very impressive. Indeed, that Muhammad's "revelations" were in fact coming from human sources is an allegation Muhammad's enemies made in trying to blunt his appeal. As the Koran describes the charge, Muhammad's message was dismissed as "tales of the ancients that he [Muhammad] hath put in writing! And they were dictated to him morn and even." At one point the Koran even addresses a specific accusation about who was doing the dictating. "They say, 'Surely a certain person teacheth him.' But the tongue of him at whom they hint is foreign, while this Koran is in the plain Arabic." 24 24 Case closed. Case closed.

Was Muhammad a Christian?

Whatever the position of the Koran on the matter, the guiding a.s.sumption of this this book is that people get their ideas about G.o.ds from mundane sources-from other people, from scriptures, or from their own creative synthesis of such input. Presumably Muhammad got theological ideas from other people, including Jesus, just as Jesus got ideas from earlier apocalyptic Jews, and just as one of those Jews, Second Isaiah, had taken strands of existing thought about Yahweh, mingled them with circ.u.mstance, and become the Bible's first unambiguously monotheistic prophet. book is that people get their ideas about G.o.ds from mundane sources-from other people, from scriptures, or from their own creative synthesis of such input. Presumably Muhammad got theological ideas from other people, including Jesus, just as Jesus got ideas from earlier apocalyptic Jews, and just as one of those Jews, Second Isaiah, had taken strands of existing thought about Yahweh, mingled them with circ.u.mstance, and become the Bible's first unambiguously monotheistic prophet.

This basically secular view of religious inspiration is of course shared by many books, including most western books about Islam. Ultimately, they either state or imply, the explanation for Islam's origins lies in mundane facts of history; Muhammad's inspiration was less exalted than Muslim tradition would have it. But there is a sense in which even these secular accounts typically defer to the Muslim insistence that Islam isn't really a descendant descendant of Judaism and Christianity. of Judaism and Christianity.

This deference lies in their account of Allah's origins. They depict Allah's evolution as initially independent of the evolution of the Judeo-Christian G.o.d and then credit Muhammad with uniting the two lineages. In Mecca before the time of Muhammad, they say, there was an indigenously Arabian G.o.d called Allah. And, as Karen Armstrong puts it in her book Islam Islam, by Muhammad's time some Arabs "had come to believe that the High G.o.d of their pantheon, al-Lah (whose name simply meant 'the G.o.d'), was the deity worshipped by the Jews and the Christians." 25 25 But it took Muhammad, and the Koran, to complete the merger, convincing Arabs that the G.o.d they'd long worshipped was in fact the G.o.d of Abraham. But it took Muhammad, and the Koran, to complete the merger, convincing Arabs that the G.o.d they'd long worshipped was in fact the G.o.d of Abraham.

This story has a nice ring to it, and the fusion of two previously distinct G.o.ds has plenty of precedent in the ancient world. But in this case the story may well be wrong, all the way down to the detail about the Arabic word Allah meaning "the G.o.d."

To be sure, a G.o.d called Allah shows up in ancient Arabic poetry that, so far as we can tell, is pre-Islamic. But there's no good reason to think he had deep roots in Arabian religious history. So why shouldn't we a.s.sume that Allah was just the Judeo-Christian G.o.d-maybe accepted into the Meccan pantheon some time earlier to cement relations with Christian trading partners from Syria, or maybe brought to Arabia by Christian or Jewish migrants earlier still? 26 26 Why shouldn't we a.s.sume that Allah and G.o.d were one and the same from the very beginning? Why shouldn't we a.s.sume that Allah and G.o.d were one and the same from the very beginning?

In the Koran, Muhammad's most common complaint about the theology of Meccan infidels is that they "join G.o.ds with G.o.d [Allah]" -that is, believe in a pantheon of G.o.ds that includes Allah. There doesn't seem to be any disagreement over Allah's ident.i.ty. Though Muhammad clearly believes that Allah is the same G.o.d as the G.o.d of Christians and Jews, he doesn't spend any time arguing the point. Indeed, he seems to a.s.sume that everyone in his audience already ascribes to Allah a key trait of the Judeo-Christian G.o.d-being creator of the universe. 27 27 To be sure, the average Meccan doesn't seem to accept other features of Judeo-Christian belief. Such as: monotheism, or the apocalyptic idea that Allah will judge all humans at the end of time and condemn infidels to h.e.l.lfire. But this is what you'd expect if, say, a foreign G.o.d had been accepted for pragmatic economic or political purposes: most Meccans wouldn't become enamored of him, worshipping him in all aspects. And certainly they wouldn't buy those aspects they would find unsettling. (For example, the idea that the G.o.ds you've long worshipped don't exist, or that worshipping them will get you broiled at the end of time.) But all signs point to their having accepted his existence. This explains the rhetorical thrust of the Koran -not to convince Meccans to believe that Allah exists or that he is the creator G.o.d, but to convince them that he is the only G.o.d worthy of devotion, indeed the only G.o.d in existence.

If Allah was indeed the Judeo-Christian G.o.d all along, that would solve at least one riddle. Marshall Hodgson, a highly respected mid-twentieth-century scholar of Islam, observed in his magisterial work The Venture of Islam The Venture of Islam that, before Muhammad came along, Allah "had no special cult"-no community of Arabs who worshipped him with special devotion. Then, a paragraph later, he reports in parentheses something that strikes him as curious: for some reason, "Christian Arabs made pilgrimage to the Ka'ba, honoring Allah there as G.o.d the Creator." that, before Muhammad came along, Allah "had no special cult"-no community of Arabs who worshipped him with special devotion. Then, a paragraph later, he reports in parentheses something that strikes him as curious: for some reason, "Christian Arabs made pilgrimage to the Ka'ba, honoring Allah there as G.o.d the Creator." 28 28 Maybe the explanation is simple: Christian Arabs Maybe the explanation is simple: Christian Arabs were were Allah's cult, and had been from the day Allah first showed up at the Ka'ba under Christian sponsorship. (To this day, Christian Arabs refer to G.o.d as Allah.) Allah's cult, and had been from the day Allah first showed up at the Ka'ba under Christian sponsorship. (To this day, Christian Arabs refer to G.o.d as Allah.) Does this mean Muhammad started his prophetic career as a Christian? As we'll see, to even put the question that way is to oversimplify the social landscape he faced. But certainly Muhammad didn't wind up accepting the theology of Christianity as now understood. And certainly, though he hoped his message would appeal to Christians, he also hoped it would appeal to Jews.

Of all the reasons to believe that the Arabian G.o.d Allah had always been the Judeo-Christian G.o.d, imported from Syria, the most powerful is phonetic. The word Syrian Christians used for G.o.d is, depending on context, either allaha allaha or or allah allah. 29 29 How likely is it that Syrians and Arabs had come to believe in two different G.o.ds who happened to have essentially the same name and to both be creator G.o.ds? That would be hard to believe even if Arabia and Syria were separated by an ocean; that they were nearby trading partners makes it only harder. How likely is it that Syrians and Arabs had come to believe in two different G.o.ds who happened to have essentially the same name and to both be creator G.o.ds? That would be hard to believe even if Arabia and Syria were separated by an ocean; that they were nearby trading partners makes it only harder.

To be sure, scholars who embrace the independent-evolution scenario have an explanation for the phonetic likeness of the Arabian G.o.d Allah and the Christian G.o.d of Syria. In Arabic, the generic word for G.o.d-for any deity-was ilah ilah, and the phrase for "the G.o.d" was al-ilah al-ilah. Through contraction, they say, this phrase could have been compressed to allah allah. 30 30 If this is indeed what happened, then the resemblance between the Arabic If this is indeed what happened, then the resemblance between the Arabic allah allah and the Syriac and the Syriac allaha allaha has an explanation that doesn't involve direct transmission from Syriac to Arabic. After all, Syriac and Arabic are, like ancient Hebrew, Semitic tongues. So if you could precisely trace the history of the Syriac word has an explanation that doesn't involve direct transmission from Syriac to Arabic. After all, Syriac and Arabic are, like ancient Hebrew, Semitic tongues. So if you could precisely trace the history of the Syriac word allaha allaha back a millennium or so, and you could do the same with the Arabic word back a millennium or so, and you could do the same with the Arabic word ilah ilah, the two lineages might well converge somewhere in the trunk of the Semitic-language family tree. Specifically, they might converge in the vicinity of a word that is enough like ilah ilah and and allaha allaha in sound and meaning to suggest close kinship with them: in sound and meaning to suggest close kinship with them: Elohim Elohim, Hebrew for G.o.d (and for G.o.d-lowercase-as well). Thus the phonetic resemblance between the Syriac word for G.o.d and the Arabic word for G.o.d could be the legacy of a common, distant ancestor, rather than signifying that the former gave birth to the latter.

The problem with this scenario lies in the next step: the idea that the name Allah Allah arose as a contraction of "the G.o.d" ( arose as a contraction of "the G.o.d" (al-ilah) to refer to a G.o.d who was pre-Islamic and non-Judeo-Christian-in other words, a G.o.d that dwelt among polytheists. How likely is it that Arabs would have been referring to a particular G.o.d simply as "the G.o.d" before they had come to believe that he was in fact "the G.o.d"-before they had accepted that there was such a thing as the one and only G.o.d? A more plausible sequence of linguistic evolution is the more straightforward one: the Arabic G.o.d"-before they had accepted that there was such a thing as the one and only G.o.d? A more plausible sequence of linguistic evolution is the more straightforward one: the Arabic Allah Allah is descended from the Syriac is descended from the Syriac allaha allaha, and allaha allaha's lineage, in turn, leads back to close kinship with Elohim. Elohim. The names change-a little-but the G.o.d remains the same. The names change-a little-but the G.o.d remains the same. 31 31 G.o.d's Phonetic Footprints.

Another Semitic language was Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus and a language ancestral to the Syriac language of Muhammad's time. Together these four languages-Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, Arabic-trace some crucial stages in the evolution of G.o.d. The Hebrew Elohim Elohim had, by the middle of the first millennium BCE, come to signify the one and only G.o.d, a G.o.d who, to the Israelites, was the arbiter of national salvation. This G.o.d as rendered in Aramaic- had, by the middle of the first millennium BCE, come to signify the one and only G.o.d, a G.o.d who, to the Israelites, was the arbiter of national salvation. This G.o.d as rendered in Aramaic-elaha-was a G.o.d who, Jesus (or at least his followers) would emphasize, could bring individual individual salvation, judging souls at the end of time. By Muhammad's day, some Christians had made individual salvation more ornate and more compelling, elaborating vividly on what paradise and h.e.l.l would be like; the Syriac name for G.o.d, salvation, judging souls at the end of time. By Muhammad's day, some Christians had made individual salvation more ornate and more compelling, elaborating vividly on what paradise and h.e.l.l would be like; the Syriac name for G.o.d, allaha allaha, or allah allah, probably embodied this vividness for Syrian believers. 32 32 If so, these connotations would have carried over into the Arabic name for G.o.d, Allah Allah. In any event, the word carried these connotations after Muhammad got through with it, and put flesh on the Judeo-Christian G.o.d that Meccan pagans had previously accepted only in skeletal form. Allah, Muhammad informed the Arabs, was not a G.o.d to be casually accepted in the service of commercial diplomacy. If you believed in him at all, you believed in a G.o.d that was omnipotent and omniscient, a G.o.d that was fair but stern, a G.o.d that would eventually judge everyone on their merits. At the end of time, said Muhammad, "every soul shall know what it hath produced." 33 33 The theology Muhammad preached to the Arabs was a natural extension of the economic logic of the day: Mecca had accepted Syria as a vital trading partner, and in keeping with pragmatic polytheistic custom it accepted the Syrian G.o.d. Muhammad just brought Meccans in touch with some distinctive properties of this G.o.d-such as an aversion to coexistence with other G.o.ds.

However logical an outgrowth of Mecca's economy Muhammad's message was, it threatened to upset that economy. The Ka'ba was a sanctuary of regional significance, drawing nearby devotees of various G.o.ds. (By some accounts it was surrounded by 360 idols.) 34 34 This was good for Meccan commerce, notably during an annual pilgrimage, when fighting was forbidden and trade flourished. This was good for Meccan commerce, notably during an annual pilgrimage, when fighting was forbidden and trade flourished. 35 35 The Ka'ba was thus one key to what regional solidarity there was in Arabia, and the Meccans profited from holding the key. Now Muhammad seemed to be saying that the whole system must be swept away, beginning with the Ka'ba's idols, the magnetic force that helped make the town the core of regional commerce. The Ka'ba was thus one key to what regional solidarity there was in Arabia, and the Meccans profited from holding the key. Now Muhammad seemed to be saying that the whole system must be swept away, beginning with the Ka'ba's idols, the magnetic force that helped make the town the core of regional commerce.

So even if Muhammad's G.o.d hadn't focused his ire on the wealthy, the Meccan ruling cla.s.s probably wouldn't have warmed to Muhammad's message. The essence of the Prophet's mission-monotheism-rendered ongoing resistance all but inevitable.

The Koran's fluctuations between tolerance and belligerence reflect changing strategies for dealing with that resistance. This may sound like a cra.s.s way to look at scripture, but in a sense this view is shared by Muslim scholars themselves; the Islamic intellectual tradition has long recognized a correlation between the Koran's content and its context. In that sense this inquiry is true to Islamic belief.

But there's a difference. Muslims see G.o.d as having tailored the Koran's different verses to the varying circ.u.mstances Muhammad would encounter. My a.s.sumption, in contrast, is that Muhammad himself was doing the tailoring-even if often unconsciously, and even if convinced that G.o.d was doing it. So when I depict the Koran as a strategic guide whose changing tone reflects changes in strategic context, I'll depict Muhammad, not G.o.d, as the strategist and as the author of the Koran. As we'll see in the next chapter, few books have doc.u.mented the rejection of their authors with such painful candor as the Koran.

Chapter Fifteen.

Mecca.

Muhammad had a lot in common with Moses. Both men were outraged by injustice-Moses by how Egyptians treated Hebrews, Muhammad by how rich Arabs treated poor Arabs. Both men raised their voices in protest. Both met resistance from the powers that be. Both decided to relocate. Muhammad, after ten years as a routinely shunned street prophet in Mecca, moved to the nearby town of Medina-the promised land-where Islam finally flourished.

Even before his exodus, Muhammad saw the parallels between himself and Moses as biblical affirmation of his mission. "Hath the story of Moses reached thee?" he asked an audience in Mecca. He often told that story, in which the Hebrew followers of Moses fare better than the Egyptian doubters of Moses, notably in their respective attempts to cross the Red Sea. Lest any Meccans miss the point, he added: "Verily, herein is a lesson for him who hath the fear of G.o.d." 1 1 Muhammad also seems to have sensed parallels between himself and Jesus. In the Koran he has a young Jesus saying, "I am the servant of G.o.d; He hath given me the Book, and He hath made me a prophet." 2 2 But the parallels between the two men go beyond their missions, extending to their political circ.u.mstances and the receptions they got. The gospel allusion to Jesus's hostile reception in Nazareth-"No prophet is accepted in the prophet's hometown" -certainly applies to Muhammad's years in Mecca. But the parallels between the two men go beyond their missions, extending to their political circ.u.mstances and the receptions they got. The gospel allusion to Jesus's hostile reception in Nazareth-"No prophet is accepted in the prophet's hometown" -certainly applies to Muhammad's years in Mecca.

It's no great surprise that Muhammad didn't stress this parallel. For one thing, he doesn't seem to have had access to the written gospels. (Muslim tradition has him as illiterate, and in any event his version of the Jesus story sometimes departs from the biblical version.) Besides, Jesus's rejection, as we've seen, is a theme the gospels play down-more and more so as time goes on; by the time the Gospel of John is written, more than half a century after the Crucifixion and centuries before Muhammad's revelation, Jesus is wowing the ma.s.ses by raising the dead.

The Koran, in contrast, never tries to hide the uncomfortable truth about its central figure. Here is a prophet who repeatedly fails to win over people who matter. Throughout the Meccan years-that is, for most of the Koran-the story of Muhammad is a story of rejection.

With this rejection begins the path to comprehending the Koran's moral vacillation. At one point Muhammad is urging Muslims to kill infidels and at another moment he is a beacon of religious tolerance. The two Muhammads seem irreconcilable at first, but they are just one man, adapting to circ.u.mstance.

Judgment Day.

As we've seen, one of the more plausible parts of the gospel story has Jesus declaring, upon emerging from the wilderness, "The Kingdom of G.o.d is at hand." Judgment Day was near; it was time for sinners to repent and affirm their belief in the one true G.o.d. From early in Muhammad's ministry, this seems to have been his message, too. The apocalypse was coming, and when it came everyone would be accountable for their actions. Muhammad sketched this culmination of history in glorious detail: When the Heaven shall cleave asunder, When the Heaven shall cleave asunder,And when the stars shall disperse,And when the seas shall be commingled,And when the graves shall be turned upside down,Each soul shall recognise its earliest and its latest actions.O man! what hath misled thee against thy generous Lord,Who hath created thee and moulded thee and shaped thee aright?In the form which pleased Him hath He fashioned thee.Even so; but ye treat the Judgment as a lie. 3 3 That last line is far from the only Koranic verse reflecting the rejection of Muhammad's message. Time and again in the Meccan suras, Muhammad is dismissed out of hand-as a "sorcerer," as an "impostor." Like Jesus, he is accused of being controlled by demonic forces, possessed by "djinn." (And, unlike Jesus, he is accused of being a "poet." Sounds flattering, but this explanation for the beauty of his Arabic verse was pejorative compared to his own explanation-that the Koran emanated from G.o.d and was conveyed via his chosen intermediary.) According to one sura, the Meccans treated Muhammad's ministry as a joke. "The sinners indeed laugh the faithful to scorn: And when they pa.s.s by them they wink at one another, And when they return to their own people, they return jesting."

Another sura describes the reaction of an influential Meccan to Muhammad's preaching: "Then looked he around him, Then frowned and scowled, Then turned his back and swelled with disdain." 4 4 Sometimes the doubters got disruptive: "The unbelievers say, 'Hearken not to this Koran, but keep up a talking, that ye may overpower the voice of the reader.'" 5 5 According to Islamic tradition, Meccan elites were so intent on shutting Muhammad up that they punished his clan not just with an economic boycott but with a According to Islamic tradition, Meccan elites were so intent on shutting Muhammad up that they punished his clan not just with an economic boycott but with a marriage marriage boycott. boycott. 6 6 All of this left Muhammad with a challenge: How do you keep intact a minority religious movement that faces hara.s.sment sanctioned by the most powerful people in the city? Fortunately for Muhammad, this wasn't the first time the Abrahamic G.o.d had encountered such a problem. The elements of a solution were already in place.

Some of them came courtesy of a Christian who lived four centuries earlier. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons near the end of the second century CE, faced circ.u.mstances even more dire than Muhammad's. Christians were a minority in Lyons, and they were being not just persecuted, but sometimes killed. How to keep the faithful on board when staying on board made life so harsh? In part, by painting a lavish picture of rewards in the afterlife. According to Irenaeus, the hereafter would feature lots of grain, delicacies galore, and highly fertile women. Plus: no work, and bodies that never tired anyway. 7 7 It wasn't clear what people would do with all this recreational time, but certainly there would be no shortage of wine to drink. "Vines shall grow, each having ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each true twig ten thousand shoots, and in each one of the shoots ten thousand cl.u.s.ters, and on every one of the cl.u.s.ters ten thousand grapes, and every grape when pressed will give five and twenty metretes of wine." It wasn't clear what people would do with all this recreational time, but certainly there would be no shortage of wine to drink. "Vines shall grow, each having ten thousand branches, and in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each true twig ten thousand shoots, and in each one of the shoots ten thousand cl.u.s.ters, and on every one of the cl.u.s.ters ten thousand grapes, and every grape when pressed will give five and twenty metretes of wine." 8 8 The paradise sketched by Irenaeus would be denounced by Christian theologians of an ascetic bent, but not by Muhammad. Like Irenaeus, he faced a steep motivational challenge, and like Irenaeus, he met it by offering his followers ample long-term compensation. After resurrection, these people of the desert could live amid "tall trees clad with fruit, and in extended shade, and by flowing waters." There would be "couches with linings of brocade" on which you could lie while food was "within easy reach." There would be "damsels with retiring glances" whom no man "had touched before." Somehow these dark-eyed beauties would remain "ever virgins, dear to their spouses." And they would never age-something they had in common with their husbands. 9 9 This was half of the incentive structure. The other half was the alternative-the place you would wind up if you weren't weren't one of Muhammad's followers. While the faithful were in paradise wearing "silken robes" and "silver bracelets," the infidels would sport "chains and collars" amid "flaming fire." If they asked for relief, they would be given "water like molten copper, that shall scald their faces." one of Muhammad's followers. While the faithful were in paradise wearing "silken robes" and "silver bracelets," the infidels would sport "chains and collars" amid "flaming fire." If they asked for relief, they would be given "water like molten copper, that shall scald their faces." 10 10 The Koran's recurring theme of reward and punishment wasn't just another carrot-and-stick device. The specter of h.e.l.l-the stick-was frightening, to be sure, but it was more than an instrument of fear. It also appealed to the sense of retributive justice; it a.s.sured the Prophet's followers that the Meccans who now mocked them would someday get their comeuppance. Remember that man who "swelled with disdain" upon seeing the Prophet preach? G.o.d "will surely cast him into h.e.l.l-fire." And remember the Meccans who tried to disrupt Koranic recitations? "The Fire! it shall be their eternal abode." 11 11 The social standing of Muhammad's followers must have made these images all the more gratifying. When you're not rich and your enemy is, his impending demise acquires a special glow. "He thinketh surely that his wealth shall be with him for ever. Nay! For verily he shall be flung into the Crushing Fire." Don't worry, said Muhammad to his followers: "Let them feast and enjoy themselves, and let hope beguile them: but they shall know the truth at last. Many a time will the infidels wish that they had been Muslims." 12 12 This is cla.s.sic apocalyptic rhetoric. Muhammad is imagining a day when the lowly will be exalted and the powerful humbled, when the last shall be first and the first shall be last. Like Second Isaiah imagining the future suffering of Israel's enemies, like the author of Revelation envisioning the demise of a repressive Roman emperor, Muhammad is sure of the coming misfortune of his tormentors. The Koran's retributive vision is no more vividly violent than that of Second Isaiah or of Revelation, but the Koran offers much more of it, pound for pound, than the Bible as a whole.

And that's not surprising, given that most of the Koran was uttered while Muhammad was in Mecca, trying to hold together a besieged band of followers. Their cohesion depended on believing that the derision they endured would reverse its polarity someday, when the faithful, in paradise at last, "reclining on bridal couches," would "laugh the infidels to scorn." 13 13 No doubt the thought of divine justice was gratifying to Muhammad himself. After all, he was the one being called a liar, an impostor-charges that seem often to have been on his mind when he spelled out the fate of infidels on Judgment Day. "Woe on that day to those who charged with imposture!" And "Taste ye the torment of the fire, which ye treated as a lie." And "This is the day of decision which ye gainsaid as an untruth." 14 14 And so on. And so on.

During the Meccan years, these images of divine retribution were as close to payback as Muslims got. The Prophet's few and lowly followers were in no position to exact retribution themselves. When critics mounted a show of force, Muhammad couldn't respond in real time; the end of time would have to do. "Let him summon his a.s.sociates," says Muhammad about one critic; for our part, we "will summon the guards of h.e.l.l." The strength Muhammad asked of his followers lay in resolve, not aggression. "Nay! obey him not; but adore, and draw nigh to G.o.d." 15 15 This is the moral irony of the Koran. On the one hand, it is vengeful; people who read it after hearing only whitewashed summaries are often surprised at the recurring air of retribution. Yet most of the retributive pa.s.sages don't encourage encourage retribution; almost always, it is G.o.d, not any Muslim, who is to punish the infidels. And during the Meccan years-most of the Koran-Muslims are encouraged to retribution; almost always, it is G.o.d, not any Muslim, who is to punish the infidels. And during the Meccan years-most of the Koran-Muslims are encouraged to resist resist the impulse of vengeance. When you encounter infidels, says one sura, "Turn thou then from them, and say, 'Peace.'" Let G.o.d handle the rest: "In the end they shall know their folly." Another Meccan sura suggests how to handle a confrontation with a confirmed infidel. Just say: "I shall never worship that which ye worship, Neither will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your religion; to me my religion." the impulse of vengeance. When you encounter infidels, says one sura, "Turn thou then from them, and say, 'Peace.'" Let G.o.d handle the rest: "In the end they shall know their folly." Another Meccan sura suggests how to handle a confrontation with a confirmed infidel. Just say: "I shall never worship that which ye worship, Neither will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your religion; to me my religion." 16 16 This message of restraint is driven home not just by Muhammad to Muslims but by G.o.d to Muhammad. G.o.d a.s.sures his prophet that he knows full well "what the infidels say: and thou art not to compel them." Just "warn... by the Koran those who fear my menace," leaving those who don't fear it to their deserved fate. After all: "thou art a warner only: Thou hast no authority over them." 17 17 This theme is constant through Muhammad's days in Mecca. In what is considered one of the earliest Meccan suras, G.o.d says to Muhammad: "Endure what they say with patience, and depart from them with a decorous departure." 18 18 And, in what is often called the last of the Meccan suras, G.o.d says: "Thy work is preaching only"; leave it for G.o.d to "take account." And here's something from the middle: "And the servants of the G.o.d of Mercy are they who walk upon the Earth softly; and when the ignorant address them, they reply, 'Peace!'" And, in what is often called the last of the Meccan suras, G.o.d says: "Thy work is preaching only"; leave it for G.o.d to "take account." And here's something from the middle: "And the servants of the G.o.d of Mercy are they who walk upon the Earth softly; and when the ignorant address them, they reply, 'Peace!'" 19 19 The principle at work here is familiar. The interpretation of G.o.d's will is obedient to facts on the ground and how they're perceived.Thelive-and-let-live philosophy flourishes when there seems nothing to be gained by fighting. That had been Paul's situation. Christians were a minority, hopelessly outgunned by polytheistic Romans, so no wonder he told his followers, "Bless those who persecute you" and "Do not repay anyone evil for evil." And no wonder Muhammad, in roughly the same situation, said, "Turn away evil by what is better, and lo! he between whom and thyself was enmity, shall be as though he were a warm friend." 20 20 And likewise, as we've seen, in the Hebrew Bible. The Israelites, after suffering a setback at the hands of the Ammonites, waxed theologically tolerant in making a peace overture to their next-door neighbors: "Should you not possess what your G.o.d Chemosh gives you to possess? And should we not be the ones to possess everything that our G.o.d Yahweh has conquered for our benefit?" When, on the other hand, fighting seemed to offer easy gains, religious tolerance faded. Thus are the Israelites told in the book of Deuteronomy to "annihilate" the Hitt.i.tes, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, and so on, "so that they may not teach you to do all the abhorrent things that they do for their G.o.ds, and you thus sin against the Lord your G.o.d." 21 21 After moving to Medina and mobilizing its resources, Muhammad would, like the Israelites of Deuteronomy, find war a more auspicious prospect. And, as we'll see, G.o.d's views on fighting infidels would change accordingly, as they did in the Bible. But so long as Muhammad remained in Mecca, fighting was unappealing and religious tolerance expansive. Indeed, at moments when collaboration with the pagans seemed attractive, Muhammad's tolerance grew so large that he was willing to give up monotheism itself. This, at least, is the apparent upshot of the "satanic verses."

The Satanic Verses.

What Muslims call the satanic verses aren't in the Koran. At least, they aren't anymore. According to Muslim tradition, they were uttered by the Prophet and thus entered scripture, but were expunged when he realized they had been inspired by Satan.

The verses involve three G.o.ddesses-Al-Lat, Al-'Uzza, and Manat-who had a big following in Arabia and whom some pagans considered daughters of Allah. Acknowledging their existence and power would have made it easier for Muhammad to do business with their adherents, and some of their adherents were influential. A nearby town where some Meccan elites owned property featured a shrine to Al-Lat. 22 22 Apparently Muhammad succ.u.mbed to the temptation. In the now expunged utterance, he said of the three G.o.ddesses that they are "exalted," adding: "And truly their intercession may be expected."

This concession seems to have proved in one sense or another ill advised. Maybe the pagans rebuffed Muhammad's overture, and maybe his followers rebelled at his apostasy. (According to Muslim tradition, pagans applauded the initiative but then Muhammad got negative feedback from the angel Gabriel.) In any event, the sura was amended. Today it calls these G.o.ddesses not "exalted" but "mere names," and there's no mention of them having the power to intercede in anything. 23 23 The idea of Muhammad turning suddenly polytheistic doesn't fit easily into Muslim tradition, and it is precisely this "theological inconvenience"-the label we put on comparable Christian and Jewish anomalies in chapter 10-that gives the story credibility. As the seminal twentieth-century scholar of Islam Montgomery Watt put it, the story is "so strange that it must be true in essentials." 24 24 And certainly the moral moral of the story makes sense: when people see the prospect of non-zero-sum interaction across religious bounds, tolerance grows. Hopes of fruitful alliance tempted Muhammad to forsake monotheism. of the story makes sense: when people see the prospect of non-zero-sum interaction across religious bounds, tolerance grows. Hopes of fruitful alliance tempted Muhammad to forsake monotheism.

Even in Meccan suras that didn't get expunged, there are signs of Muhammad trying to build interfaith coalitions. He seems, for starters, to be reaching out to Jews. The evidence for this doesn't lie in his extensive reference to Jewish scripture. (It is natural that he'd cite the Judeo-Christian Bible as authority for his otherwise radical p.r.o.nouncements, given its connection to the august and cosmopolitan Byzantine Empire.) Rather, the evidence lies in the fact that while in Mecca he says nothing bad about the Jews and says some flattering things about their ancestors. G.o.d, in his "prescience," chose "the children of Israel... above all peoples." 25 25 And in a sura normally dated late in the Meccan period, Muhammad seems eager to reach an accommodation with both Jews and Christians. The sura explains how to relate to recipients of "earlier revelations." 26 26 Muslims are not to argue with them "unless in the mildest manner" (though if the Christian or Jew in question has behaved "injuriously toward you" no such reserve is in order). Instead, they should emphasize common ground: "We believe in what hath been sent down to us and hath been sent down to you. Our G.o.d and your G.o.d is one." Muslims are not to argue with them "unless in the mildest manner" (though if the Christian or Jew in question has behaved "injuriously toward you" no such reserve is in order). Instead, they should emphasize common ground: "We believe in what hath been sent down to us and hath been sent down to you. Our G.o.d and your G.o.d is one." 27 27 In short, Muhammad was a savvy politician, eager to build coalitions, mindful of muting differences that would impede that project. Some Muslims might reject this use of the word "politician," along with its implication that Islamic scripture can be seen as mere rhetoric. And some critics of Islam might welcome the word as support for the claim that Muhammad's "revelation" was just an elaborate ploy, part of the Prophet's scheme to ama.s.s power.

Both of these reactions are modern reactions. They come from a world in which the realms of religion and politics are often clearly distinct. In earlier times, as we've seen again and again, religion and politics were flip sides of the same coin. No doubt Muhammad's special access to G.o.d's word gave him mundane authority in the eyes of believers. No doubt the same was true of Jesus and of Moses. But that doesn't mean that any of these men considered their link to the divine less than genuine. Whatever you think about the reality of divine inspiration, human nature permits people to believe they are under its influence. More to the point: people can believe they are under the influence of divine guidance that, as it happens, is politically savvy in light of their own perception of the facts on the ground. We are political animals, and natural selection gave us political gyroscopes that can work in strange and wondrous ways.

After moving to Medina, Muhammad would make the connection between religion and politics clear. "Obey G.o.d and obey the Apostle" is a phrase that occurs several times in Medinan suras and never in Meccan suras. 28 28 While in Mecca, Muhammad doesn't yet have the clout to make such demands-at least, not explicitly; Meccan suras often say things like "Fear G.o.d and obey me," but these words are put in the mouths of biblical figures with whom Muhammad is implicitly comparing himself. While in Mecca, Muhammad doesn't yet have the clout to make such demands-at least, not explicitly; Meccan suras often say things like "Fear G.o.d and obey me," but these words are put in the mouths of biblical figures with whom Muhammad is implicitly comparing himself. 29 29 His followers were free, of course, to draw their own conclusions. His followers were free, of course, to draw their own conclusions.

So too with suggestions that infidels might get punished not just in the hereafter but in the here and now. Meccan suras note how often in the Bible people who don't believe in G.o.d wind up dying en ma.s.se-a hint, perhaps, that, notwithstanding the great Koranic emphasis on the unpleasantness of h.e.l.l, a taste of divine retribution might conceivably show up before before Judgment Day. Yet the Muhammad of Mecca never makes this threat explicit or encourages his followers to realize it. He has no army; the mission would have been suicidal. Judgment Day. Yet the Muhammad of Mecca never makes this threat explicit or encourages his followers to realize it. He has no army; the mission would have been suicidal.

The Muhammad of Mecca, in short, is like Jesus. He never acquires the formal political power of Moses, much less of Israel's King Josiah, who ruled a mature state and whose scriptural legacy is the sanctioning of genocide against infidels. And the Muhammad of Medina certainly never acquires the power of an Emperor Constantine. By some accounts, Constantine had nails he believed to have come from Jesus's cross melted down and made into a bit for his warhorse. Whether or not this story is true, it captures a truth: Constantine, perhaps forgetting the part about turning the other cheek, had used the cross partly as an icon of large-scale violence.

We'll never know what Jesus would have been like had his mission succeeded politically before he could be crucified. We'll never know what Moses would have been like had he wound up with a potent army at his disposal. In Muhammad's case, we know. After a decade of preaching in Mecca, he and a band of followers went to Medina (then called Yathrib). Muhammad was about to acquire real power, and things were about to change.

Chapter Sixteen.

Medina.

When Muhammad and other Muslims from Mecca first rode their camels into Medina, men and women lined the route crying "Come is the Prophet of G.o.d! Come is the Prophet of G.o.d!" 1 1 At least that's the story that entered Islamic tradition in the centuries after Muhammad's death. Its spirit lives on in popular western accounts of Islam's birth. In this telling, the tribal chiefs of Medina, fed up with mutual strife, ask Muhammad to come quell the infighting, vowing to abide by his arbitration. At least that's the story that entered Islamic tradition in the centuries after Muhammad's death. Its spirit lives on in popular western accounts of Islam's birth. In this telling, the tribal chiefs of Medina, fed up with mutual strife, ask Muhammad to come quell the infighting, vowing to abide by his arbitration. 2 2 He shows up, is warmly welcomed, and calmly a.s.sumes his ordained role of leadership. He shows up, is warmly welcomed, and calmly a.s.sumes his ordained role of leadership.

But that story about Muhammad's welcome in Medina is no more reliable than the stories about Jesus in the gospels, also written well after the fact. The Koran itself, a more immediate witness to events, paints a different picture.

Consider that simple refrain first uttered in one of the earliest Medinan suras: "Obey G.o.d then and obey the apostle." Apparently people couldn't be counted on to obey Muhammad without the occasional reminder. And maybe not even then; the next line in this sura is a disclaimer: "but if ye turn away, our apostle is not to blame, for he is only charged with plain preaching." 3 3 Indeed, suras from Medina suggest that there, as in Mecca, Muhammad was still nurturing a movement, trying to win converts. In one early Medinan sura, G.o.d gives Muhammad recruiting instructions, employing the same formula used by Paul to recruit Christians half a millennium earlier: "Say: If ye love G.o.d, then follow me: G.o.d will love you, and forgive your sins, for G.o.d is Forgiving, Merciful." And there is the flip side of the incentive structure: " If ye love G.o.d, then follow me: G.o.d will love you, and forgive your sins, for G.o.d is Forgiving, Merciful." And there is the flip side of the incentive structure: "Say: Obey G.o.d and the Apostle; but if ye turn away, then verily, G.o.d loveth not the unbelievers." Obey G.o.d and the Apostle; but if ye turn away, then verily, G.o.d loveth not the unbelievers." 4 4 If the standard account of Muhammad's entry into Medina is too simple, what is the real story? It's almost certainly true, as early Islamic tradition holds, that while in Mecca he had cultivated a group of supporters in Medina. When he and his Meccan coterie settled in Medina they had a base of support and more security than they'd known before. You might even say, as some scholars have put it, that Muhammad had created a new Medinan "tribe"-a tribe based on common belief, not common ancestry, but still a tribe, a tribe that would now grow to dominate the city and then the region. 5 5 To be sure, Islam wouldn't replace existing tribes; it was a tribe you could join even while preserving your kin-based ties. Still, the Medinan suras suggest that Muhammad was asking for a commitment that could strain traditional lines of devotion. "O ye who believe! Verily, in your wives and your children ye have an enemy: wherefore beware of them." 6 6 This line from a Medinan sura is quite like an utterance attributed to Jesus in the gospels: "I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up the cross and follow me is not worthy of me." 7 7 However jarring these pa.s.sages from the Koran and the gospels, both make sense. If Muhammad's movement in Medina was to succeed, and if the Jesus movement in the Roman Empire was to succeed, they had to inspire a devotion that transcended existing allegiance. Both religions were engaged in re-engineering, creating a new kind of social organization. And if you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs.

In fact, the births of all three Abrahamic religions were exercises in large-scale social engineering. With ancient Israel, once-autonomous tribes drew together, first into a confederacy and then into a state. The birth of Christianity saw a second kind of social consolidation, not of tribes but of whole ethnicities. There was "no longer Jew or Greek"-or Roman or Egyptian -for all believers were "one in Christ Jesus." The Roman Empire within which Christianity spread was a multinational empire, and Christianity became a multinational religion.

With the birth of Islam both of these thresholds-the conglomeration of tribes and of national ethnicities-would be crossed in short order. When Muhammad made the hijra hijra, the migration from Mecca to Medina, there was no centralized governance of the tribes in Medina, much less in the Arabian Peninsula writ large. By the time he died in 632, tribes in Medina, Mecca, and much of surrounding Arabia acknowledged his authority. Five years later, Islamic rule would encompa.s.s not just the Arabs, but Syrians-people whom we now consider Arabs but who didn't speak the Arabic language before they came into Islam's fold. And, as Muslim armies were taking Syria from the Byzantine Empire, they were also taking Iraq from the Persian Empire. Next came Egypt and Palestine; 8 8 within a decade of the Prophet's death, both had pa.s.sed from Byzantine to Islamic hands, and the conquest of Iran, heart of the Persian Empire, had begun. within a decade of the Prophet's death, both had pa.s.sed from Byzantine to Islamic hands, and the conquest of Iran, heart of the Persian Empire, had begun. 9 9 In the quarter century after Muhammad migrated from Mecca to Medina, possessing less power than the mayor of a small town, an Islamic state formed and became a multinational empire. In the quarter century after Muhammad migrated from Mecca to Medina, possessing less power than the mayor of a small town, an Islamic state formed and became a multinational empire.

This expansion is all the more amazing when you look at the unpromising social fabric that awaited Muhammad upon his arrival in Medina. The town's Arab tribes, in addition to being heavily polytheist, had a history of feuding. There was a further complication that apparently hadn't existed in Mecca: whole tribes of Jews. And there seem to have been an appreciable number of Christians. 10 10 A religious and ethnic landscape this diverse wasn't naturally amenable to centralized political control. Mobilizing and unifying these const.i.tuencies was a job of nearly superhuman proportions. A religious and ethnic landscape this diverse wasn't naturally amenable to centralized political control. Mobilizing and unifying these const.i.tuencies was a job of nearly superhuman proportions.

And Muhammad didn't succeed at it. To judge by the Koran, his political domination of Medina, then Mecca, then lands beyond, proceeded without many Jews and Christians buying into the project. In fact, that may be putting it mildly. According to Islamic scripture and oral tradition, and to the western histories based on these sources, Muhammad's relations with Christians and Jews grew hostile and, in some cases, violent.

What was the source of the hostility? Some of Muhammad's Koranic utterances suggest that theology was the problem: both Christians and Jews fell short of the pure monotheism of Islam, said Muhammad, and so were disturbingly reminiscent of polytheists. They "imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. G.o.d's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!" 11 11 The idea that theological differences were the prime mover of intra-Abrahamic conflict has natural appeal today, when dogmatic certainty pervades tensions among Muslims, Christians, and Jews. But the truth is more complicated. A close look at the Koran suggests that the issues Muhammad had with Christians and Jews weren't only, or even mainly, theological. What's more, as we'll see, the depth of the tensions, including the intensity of Muhammad's famous "break with the Jews," may have been exaggerated in Islamic tradition and in history books. In any event, to think of Muhammad as clinging to a rigid creed is to misunderstand who he was and how he built Islam into a force that has been with the world ever since.

Building the Base.

In one sense, the difference between Muhammad in Mecca and Muhammad in Medina is the difference between a prophet and a politician. In Medina, Muhammad started building an actual government, and the Medin