Comparison of Muhammad and Jesus

As a cradle Catholic and a person mostly ignorant where Islam is concerned, I thought it would be an interesting exercise to compare and contrast what I remember about the life of Jesus to what I have recently learned about the life of Muhammad. Most of what I have learned about Muhammad has been derived from Ways of the World Second Edition A Brief Global History with Sources by Robert W. Strayer and The World's Religions: Worldviews and Contemporary Issues, Fourth Edition by William A. Young.

From what I have gathered, there is a better historical account of Muhammad’s life than there is of Jesus. Muhammad was orphaned at a young age and adopted by his uncle, Abu Talid, who was the leader of the Quraysh tribe of Mecca (Young). In contrast, very little is known about Jesus’s childhood. The story of his birth is mainly considered a legend that was preserved within only two of the New Testament Gospels. In terms of Jesus’s childhood, there is only reference in the Bible to a trip he made to the temple in Jerusalem at the age of twelve. Jesus was not an orphan like Muhammad, and unlike Muhammad who was raised by the leader of an Arabian tribe, Jesus grew up under the tutelage of his stepfather, Joseph, who was a carpenter. Both Muhammad and Jesus worshiped one God and eventually convinced others to do likewise.

As Muhammad grew, he developed a reputation for being spiritual, truthful, generous, sincere, and a skilled mediator (Young and Strayer). At the age of twenty-five, he chose to marry a wealthy widow named Khadija, which provided him freedom to engage in private spiritual discipline and time to reflect on the situation of people in the world around him. It was not until the age of forty that the angel Gabriel appeared to Muhammad and commanded him to “Read [or Recite] in the name of the Lord” (Young). Over the next twenty plus years, he continued to receive revelations and those revelations became the Quran. In spite of his lack of formal education and lifelong illiteracy, he converted thousands to Islam, led a military campaign, re-instituted pilgrimages to Mecca, and became both the religious and political leader in Arabia of the new “nation of Islam” (Young & Strayer). He also had multiple wives and children, however, his sons died in infancy, which may be one of the reasons he did not leave clear instructions as to who should succeed him upon his death.

Compared to Muhammad, we only have information on a three year period of Jesus’s adult life. At the age of thirty, Jesus spends forty days alone in the desert prior to beginning his ministry, and during that time, overcomes Satan’s temptations in which Satan tries to persuade Jesus to use his own power for political or personal ends. Rather than receiving revelations from God, Jesus is the revelation, sent by God the father to become human and bring forth “The Kingdom of God” (Young); a new age of people living harmoniously with God and one another. Many reform their lives and become disciples of Jesus after hearing him speak, witnessing him perform miracles, or learning about the miracles from others. However, to fully bring about the new age, Jesus ultimately had to sacrifice himself in order to free people from the enslavement of sin and death. This seems to imply the new age will only occur in the afterlife.

Although Jesus never married or had children in his short span of life, he did train twelve Apostles during the few years of his ministry and instructed them to continue teaching his ways after his death. The Gospels indicate he even appeared to the Apostles and other disciples after his death to provide them with divine gifts and help guide them with their continued ministry. Unlike Muhammad, Jesus was never a military or political leader during his lifespan. He was a great religious leader though, and through his instruction of others and his own actions, Christianity became one of the largest religions in the World.

I thought of a few striking differences and similarities between Muhammad and Jesus. One difference is the more servant like form of leadership Jesus embodies versus the more traditional king like leadership of Muhammad. While Muhammad is the founder of Islam, his life story seems more reflective of the messiah the Jews were originally expecting. Between Jesus and Muhammad, Muhammad's leadership style is much more in line with King David’s. Jesus seems to fulfill the story of Abraham’s requested sacrifice of Isaac, while Muhammad’s life is more reminiscent of portions of Moses’s life story, particularly his time spent in solitary reflection, receiving revelations from God and relaying those revelations to the people. Muhammad views himself as a messenger of God rather than as the son of God. I do not have the impression Muhammad ever thought of himself as divine, but he certainly let God work through him, as did Jesus. Both of them convinced many to live in harmony with God and reached out particularly to those viewed as lower class during their respective times in history. Jesus and Muhammad are each seen as the final revelation of God by their respective followers. I see them both as having dedicated their lives to revealing God’s truths, clarifying God’s laws, warning against idolatry, and by way of their personal qualities and lives, succeeding to a certain extent in their missions. Their messages transcended their deaths and led to billions of followers worldwide. While the world is far from living in social harmony, the core messages of both Jesus and Muhammad seem like they would result in greater social harmony if the messages were followed as intended.

Late Classical Era:

I’m struggling to come up with some type of cohesive thought on a specific topic covered in this week's assigned reading.  My struggle may partly ensue from a desire to identify information from the past that can be used to intentionally influence the present and direct the future.  I must be discontent with at least some aspects of the current state of the World if I desire to change the course of history.

Perhaps as we learned last week, I need to follow the Analects of Confucius, particularly, “What the superior man seeks , is in himself.  What the mean man seeks, is in others.”  It is much easier to see the harm others inflict than the harm I inflict upon others. 

Some human behaviors dating back at least as far as the commerce that flourished via the silk, sea and sand roads (i.e. between approximately 200 B.C.E. and 1500 C.E.) seemed not unlike behaviors of current times.  For instance; obtaining luxury goods from distant lands to convey status within communities not located near major cosmopolitan cities or for elites to distinguish themselves from commoners (Strayer page 316).  Human beings continue to use products as status symbols; designer clothes, jewelry, automobiles, homes, exclusive memberships, technology, etc.  Back then, it was silk and cotton goods, porcelain, ivory, gold, tortoiseshell, jade, spices, etc.   

Growth in the demand for luxury goods reshaped not only the lives of those producing them, transporting them and receiving them, but the regions the goods traveled from, through and to as well.  As an example, Chinese peasants began producing silk, porcelain, paper, lacquer ware and iron tools for sale in distance locales instead of producing food.  This change reduced the economic self-sufficiency of their local societies (Strayer pages 316 and 321) not unlike today.  Those transporting and selling the goods often experienced economic and social mobility, as they became part of wealthy merchant classes.  States who taxed both the producers and merchants experienced economic growth and increased power over larger areas, and in turn, were able to provide more security to merchants and travelers.  Some merchants who were able to supply the demand for luxury goods amassed great fortunes.  Much of this seems like a precursor to the capitalism and materialism of present times.

It was also interesting to read how owning luxury goods helped propel new people to positions of power or helped those already in leadership positions to maintain and increase their power.  One could argue this is similar to the wealthy elite classes of today.  I can see some of the appeal in obtaining large amounts of wealth and power.  This past weekend, I had a problem with my computer network at home.  In the midst of my frustrating attempt at pretending to be an IT specialist, I thought it would be nice to be a modern day Emperor who could simply order someone else to fix the problem while I used my time in a much more enjoyable fashion.  I think many of us dream of financial independence, being served rather than serving, avoiding labors we do not enjoy performing, etc.  Unfortunately, it appears throughout history, some forms of this come at a great cost to others.  I was surprised to learn some Buddhists owned slaves and African leaders traded slaves for luxury goods.  While society no longer practices slavery, I think some factions still have a tendency to see just how nominal a wage they can pay workers in order to maximize the profits on the goods being produced and sold.  As consumers looking for inexpensive goods, we might be sustaining such systems.  I would like to spend some time researching possible alternatives.

I was surprised to learn west Africans traded gold for salt.  In our current value system, that seems ludicrous.  However, they were simply bartering for a dietary and food preservation necessity with a precious metal that seemed to be plentiful at the time.

Companies that create copycats of products today do not seem much different from how the Korean, Japanese, Indian and Persians ended China’s monopoly on the production of silk by learning to produce it themselves.

Culture and disease spread through the silk, sea and sand roads too.  The spread of religious and political ideologies had an even more influential role on changing the globe than commerce.  If we focus on values common to humanity rather than just on our own individual and national interests, we may very well end up intentionally changing the direction of history.