BIOGRAPHY OF THE PROPHET (SĪRAH) IN THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT AND WESTERN ORIENTALIST LITERATURE: A HISTORICAL AND INTELLECTUAL STUDY OF THE CRITIQUES

Abstract

This comprehensive analytical study critically examines the critiques, allegations, and attempts at distortion (tamsīkh) of the Prophet Muhammad's (Sīrah) found in Orientalist literature, spanning both the Indian Subcontinent and the West. The paper's core premise is that Western scholars and Orientalists, driven by a continuous and inherited bias and animosity, have relentlessly targeted the Prophet's pure personality and life history since the inception of the Orientalist movement up to the present day.The research traces the historical roots of this malice, starting with the written polemics of John of Damascus (Yūhannā Dimashqī) in the 7th century CE, who denied the prophethood of Islam and the Prophet, fabricating mythological narratives to portray him (God forbid) as a mere hero of folk tales. During the Middle Ages, this hostility was maintained by the Church, which distorted his name into epithets like 'Mahound' and presented him as the 'Adversary of Christ.'A significant focus of the paper is the conduct of modern Orientalism. It critiques the common belief that 19th and 20th-century Orientalists, such as Montgomery Watt and Philip K. Hitti, studied the Sīrah objectively, free from bias. The study argues that the reality is quite the opposite: modern scholars have merely continued the efforts to distort the Sīrah by cloaking their inherited biases and superstitions in a new scientific guise, objective language, and modern terminology. This new approach is likened to "an old hunter bringing new nets," where the ancient venom is cleverly mixed into a seemingly praiseworthy cup of Mustafa's (ﷺ) biography.The analytical study offers a detailed breakdown of the specific and serious allegations leveled by Orientalists: Attacks on Character and Health: They falsely depicted the Prophet (ﷺ) (God forbid) as deceitful, lacking high morals, and, escalating the old accusations, attempted to prove he suffered from epilepsy or seizures (sar’(Diminution of Lineage and Social Status: Orientalists sought to undermine his familial dignity by claiming his Abrahamic lineage was an invention by his followers, and attempted to portray the Banū Hāshim clan as financially weak and socially insignificant in Mecca. Rationalizing Success: Instead of acknowledging Divine support, they attributed the Prophet's success solely to the demands of the time, favorable socio-economic environment, and his personal skills (political astuteness or administrative expertise). Some even interpreted the rise of Islam as a natural reaction to the monopolistic control of trade by Meccan capitalists (drawing on Marxist philosophy).Controversial Subjects: They claimed his multiple marriages were evidence of 'lust/sensualism' and, despite him being the greatest champion of Monotheism, accused him of 'polytheism' (shirk), suggesting his beliefs were not much different from Meccan idolaters or that turning towards the Kaaba in prayer was a form of idolatry Accusations of Violence and Aggression: Muslim campaigns were termed 'raids/robbery' (Razzias), and he was accused of compelling people to accept Islam "by the sword."The paper concludes that this bias and animosity are not merely a thing of the past but a contemporary reality. The Western support for blasphemous claimants like Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani in the 20th century, the patronage of Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen, and the publication of offensive cartoons in European newspapers in 2005 are all clear evidence that the prejudiced attitude of the West toward the Prophet (ﷺ) has not genuinely changed. The ultimate finding of this research is that the fundamental objective of Orientalism is not the pursuit of truth but the distortion of the Prophet's image (tamsīkh-i taṣwīr-i nabawī) to alienate Muslims and other nations from his noble personality.