Senior Seminar in Religion                                                                                         

March 7, 2002

Block VI                                                                                                         

Under the Shades of Swords:

A Sacrificial, Victimized Prophet and His Modern Veneration through Imitation

Jonathan Engle

Introduction

            The Arabic word for martyr is “shahid” which, literally translated, means “witness.” Muslim martyrs are witness to the fundamental concept of “tawhid” and the recitation of the “shahada”; both refer to the creed that there is but one God and Muhammad is His messenger. The shahada carries further implications of martyrdom, or the willingness to die in defense of this creed. ^[1] Martyrs are witnesses to the oneness of Allah and the prophecy of Muhammad. In Islam, they testify to the unifying principle that Muhammad established in two ways. Their sacrificial deaths cauterize the bleeding of a wounded community; they serve as the catharsis around which their people will unify. The principles of their tradition form the second element of their witness. Muhammad realized that monotheism would create an egalitarian standard, and he gathered his people around it. But his preaching would have been incomplete without his own voluntary, exemplary victimhood. His life was devoted to modeling the sacrifice he would demand of Muslims. Sunni traditions, especially those under extreme stress, accentuate this aspect of his character in their ideologies.

            Rene Girard’s theories locate sacrifice within a mimetic system that scapegoats its victims. In the Divine Comedy, Dante exemplified the scapegoating mechanism with relation to the Prophet by condemning Muhammad to the lowest of 7 hells. Initially, this judgement seems inappropriate. A man venerated by multitudes of reasoning individuals for upholding virtues of Christian society hardly deserves its most severe punishment. The Crusades may have formed Dante’s context, but he appears to ignore the scientific, social, and moral contributions of the religion birthed by Muhammad’s faith. Europe owes the preservation of its analytical traditions thru the Dark Ages to Muslim scholars and librarians. The Muslim empire was extraordinarily tolerant; it permitted religious freedom and demanded little of its subjects. And Muslim society has spawned both peace and war to an extent that is comparable with European nationalism.

            The rivalry between Christianity and Islam is mimetic. Both desire whatever the other possesses, beginning with Palestine and the Holy Land, extending to the potential wealth and power created by modernity as well as the spoils of fading colonialism. To Christianity, and Dante, Muhammad exemplifies Arabia’s intrusion into the western world. Shackling the Prophet with the judgement of God undercuts Muhammad’s entire religion. He becomes the West’s scapegoat, and the victimization of his own faith and Allah’s religion allow Christianity to congregate around their burning corpses. American media broadcasts the most recent demonstrations of this sacrifice from the White House, the newsroom, and the caves of Afghanistan. We are fighting our own holy war (a more potent example of mimesis), and many Americans have already cognitively gathered around a pyre fueled by the Taliban and all forms of militant Islam.

            However, Dante was not the first to sacrifice Muhammad on a communal altar. Whereas Dante sacrificed a scapegoat, Muhammad took the guilt of sacrifice upon himself. In the years subsequent to Muhammad’s death, Islam developed his exemplary sacrificial character. This development initially manifested itself in interpretations of the Quran and Hadith, but was later extended to the imitative ideologies of fundamentalist, revisionist, revivalist and islamicist movements of modern times. Such groups often struggle against impossible, disheartening odds. The desperate stand of martyrdom seems the only plausible way to emulate Muhammad in their situations, so their authors emphasize texts which support voluntary sacrifice. Therefore, Girard’s theory suggests convincing methods of understanding Sunni Muslims’ identification with their Prophet, though the quantity of Girard’s own work on Islam is relatively small. This paper attempts to use Girard’s methodology to understand the sacrificial character of modern Islam’s militant communities.

Muhammad and Girard

            The Messenger of Allah experienced little peace during the years of the Revelation. Allah often transmitted the Quran violently. The Angel Gabriel nearly suffocated Muhammad at least once. The Meccan community expelled him by threatening his life. The Jewish community in Medina betrayed him after offering him shelter, and he was never relieved of responsibility for his community. He fought 18 military campaigns, received at least two serious wounds, and is rumored to have died of poisoning. But suffering does not always connote sacrifice. Muhammad’s biography must satisfy the criteria for sacrificial victims that Girard establishes in The Scapegoat ^[2] before this interpretation can be applied to modern times.

            Girard’s outline of victims’ traits begins with an explanation of the process that leads to sacrifice. Crisis is the catalyst. When a society experiences crisis, divisions that once constituted the social structure disappear: “Culture is somehow eclipsed as it becomes less differentiated.” ^[3]   A community will actually rally around its disunity while beginning the search for a victim that will ultimately prove cathartic. At this stage, the community must convince itself of the chosen sacrifice’s guilt. So begins the process of accusation. Charges leveled must propitiate a collectively violent sentiment and provide release for guilt through justified sacrifice. Because of this condition, Girard’s victims sometimes exhibit a definable set of qualities that make them particularly susceptible to persecution. These qualities include physical deformities, sickness, disability, and weakness. Generally speaking, crowds choose those struggling to conform to a social norm. Racial, social, or economic minorities are desirable candidates,  as well as some who are rich and powerful, since it is easy for the mob to blame them for the crisis. Societies pick victims that threaten their unity.

            Girard further elucidates this concept of unity, and his final paragraphs on victim selection are particularly relevant to an analysis of Muhammad’s life. In a remarkable analogy to the human body, he explains his thoughts on differences within and without the system:

The human body is a system of anatomic differences. If a disability, even as the result of an accident, is disturbing, it is because it gives the impression of a disturbing dynamism. It seems to threaten the very system. Efforts to limit it are unsuccessful; it disturbs the differences that surround it. These in turn become monstrous, rush together, are compressed and blended together to the point of destruction. Difference that exists outside the system is terrifying because it reveals the truth of the system, its relativity, its fragility, and its morality. The various kinds of victims seem predisposed to crimes that eliminate differences. ^[4]

When members of a society subvert the distinctions that buttress the social system, the social system often turns upon them and makes them the objects of its unifying wrath.

            Muhammad was guilty of such subversion in the initial years of his prophecy. He attacked the Meccan social structure and was expelled. Many years passed before he enjoyed the security of the majority. In the latter Medinan years, the nature of his sacrifice changed. With several campaigns behind him and more looming on the horizon, he offered himself voluntarily on and off the battlefield. His eventual death, supposedly at the hand of a poisonous Jewess, cemented his martyrdom in the eyes of Muslim tradition. In fact, an evaluation of his life reveals that he possessed the traits of a victim that Girard lists while also embodying a controlled mimetic desire which perpetuated the sacrificial system.

Crisis and Accusation

            Muhammad did not enter a crisis that was recognized by his community. In fact, he participated peaceably in communal functions for approximately 40 years before he began the “recitation” around 610 C.E.. ^[5] He lived in Mecca, the largest, most prosperous city in the Hijaz, and took part in trading ventures through the investments of his first wife. Like most Arabs of his day who could afford to do so, he took an annual retreat to a secluded point in a mountain cave to distribute alms and meditate in spiritual peace. This peace, however, was interrupted by his vision of the angel Gabriel, who (literally) squeezed the first Suras of the Quran from Muhammad’s lungs.

            The message brought by the Recitation troubled even Muhammad. At the time, the Arab peninsula was a cacophonous mass of bedouin tribes who worshiped a pantheon of jinn, or mystical spirits said to roam the deserts working mischief. Outside of urban areas, society was nomadically established and often primitively cruel. Cities like Mecca enjoyed privilege as centers of trade and were content with the position and wealth their identity conferred upon them. Muhammad was party to the goings-on of his day, and knew that fellow Arabs would not welcome his words because of the threat they posed to the establishment of community.

            Muhammad’s basic message had two parts: monotheism and social justice. Monotheism intruded upon the mystical beliefs and practices of Arab religion, even though it elevated an old Arab god to the newly available and singular metaphysical throne. Muhammad’s revelation “reminded” the Quraysh of their commitment to Allah. They believed Allah had founded their city and even preserved it in times of trouble. ^[6]   Furthermore, the bedouin had built pieces of their social structure upon individuals who possessed special abilities in relating to the jinn. The skills of these individuals kept jinns’ malicious actions contained and were hence indispensable to the community. Adopting a monotheistic approach not only demanded serious changes in their religious ideology, it also subverted the distinctions between individuals and groups established within Arab society. There could be no more spiritual hierarchy, either between the Meccans and the bedouin or between those able and unable to mediate between Arabs and the jinn.

            Social justice incorporated more egalitarianism. Muhammad applied it to the situation inside Mecca’s  community. The poor, disabled, orphans and elderly were to be cared for by public generosity–an idea that had been present before the Quraysh took advantage of trading to pad their pockets. The materialism and individualism spawned by their newfound wealth created further problems for Muhammad’s revelation to address. Mercantile exchanges were often corrupt in Mecca–insiders took advantage of those who came to circumambulate the Ka’aba, a shrine said to have been built by Abraham and Ishmael (to whom Arabs traced their decent). The Prophet’s concept of social equality further threatened the distinctions that Meccans had used to define their city.

            Naturally, Muhammad encountered significant resistance. Instead of unifying Mecca underneath his universal claims, he was dividing it between his own followers and those of the Quraysh. His preaching initially attracted particularly vulnerable converts at the lower end of the social totem pole. The two parts of his claim, combined with the predominant demographic of his followers, made the developing Muslim community an ideal scapegoat. Muslim belief questioned the existence of differences outside the system of Meccan society, to use Girard’s terms. Muhammad’s community grew slowly and their mimetic rivalry with the rest of Meccan society escalated towards an inescapable conclusion. The pitch of enmity reached a crescendo when Muhammad forbade his followers to participate in the rituals demanded by the gods of Meccan ancestors. In the words of Karen Armstrong, one of the Prophet’s most respected biographers:

We have seen that the monotheistic creed did not merely require an intellectual assent but a change of consciousness. The Prophet’s demand inspired deep fear because it threatened sanctities on which the very survival of society was believed to depend. ^[7]

So the accusations began. Girard claims that victims are typically accused of crimes which transgress taboos the community holds most sacred, and the charges Meccan society leveled at Muhammad imply that he struck at its heart. ^[8] He was accused of being an apostate, an atheist, and unfaithful to their forefathers. Such accusations were, in part, true; Muhammad had undermined the stability of the Meccan social system with his radical preaching. The Quraysh were, in reality, only blaming Muhammad for the strife he had created. But the fact that they did not have to trump up charges, as is typical in Girard’s supportive examples, did nothing to diffuse their anger.         

Sacrifice by Expulsion

            The Quraysh slowly united against all of Muhammad’s followers, who became more and more uncertain about their own physical safety. Many did not enjoy the protection that Muhammad’s father-in-law afforded to those within his clan. Fortunately for their eventual safety, Muhammad had several encounters with Arabs living in the city of Medina, about 300 miles north of Mecca. These Arabs had lived with the Jews of that city for generations and were not at all shocked by the monotheism the Prophet propounded. As the situation in Mecca slowly degenerated, Muslims emigrated in droves; the relocation culminated in Muhammad’s own daring night escape from an attempted assassination.

            This was, however, no mere change of address. The Muslims were making a horrifying decision by leaving the protection of their clans to place themselves under the wings of a community to which they claimed no blood ties. Their actions were unthinkable in the Arab society of the day. Furthermore, the Quran makes it clear that the Muslims were expelled from Mecca, which lends validity to the sacrificial interpretation suggested above. ^[9]   According to Hubert and Mauss, the expulsion of the sacrifice is tantamount to the victim’s murder and destruction, which the Meccan community attempted with the Prophet. Sacrifices must entirely disappear, whether they are immolated or merely driven away. ^[10] The Hijra bears a striking resemblance to one of their examples:

There were cases of its expulsion without its being put to death....The Bird released in the fields at the sacrifice of the purification of the lepers in Judea, the $@b84:@H , hounded from the houses and out of the city of Athens, were sacrificed in this way. ^[11]

Muhammad’s expulsion therefore results from a crisis which threatened the fundamental distinctions of his Meccan community. The Quraysh, after blaming him for the situation, however justly, sentenced him to an unjust death. The fact that they attempted the Prophet’s assassination at night, when they clearly outnumbered the entire Muslim community in the city and would have overwhelmed the remnant not already in Medina,  only demonstrates the extent to which the face of the victim had conflicted their consciences. The failure of their attempt did little to affect the sacrifice; they merely failed to anticipate the Prophet’s return.

Mythological Returns: The Night Journey

            Muhammad’s most arresting mystical experience was the Mi’raj, or night journey. While he slept, the angel Gabriel transported him to Jerusalem. There, he supposedly stood on the center piece of the modern temple called the Dome of the Rock before ascending through the seven levels of heaven. On each level, he encountered other prophets common to both Muslim and Hebrew traditions, the highest two of which contain men of action and battle: Moses and Abraham. His climb ended at the highest level, and the order in which he met these different prophets clearly indicates a hierarchy. Of the seven patriarchs of Islam and Judaism, the two located highest in the pyramid were both men of action and war. Moses led the Israelite nation out from Egypt and persecution to a promised land, much of which had to be conquered along the way. Nor was Abraham a stranger to battle: In Genesis 14, Abraham must go after his nephew Lot, who has been taken captive. He leads his army of trained men to the successful recovery of the boy. The lofty positioning of men with these qualities while less warlike leaders (such as Adam, Aaron, and Jesus) remain below signifies that their traits are highly valued in the Muslim tradition. ^[12]

            The actual event of Muhammad’s night journey can also be considered sacrificial. Morteza Mutahari. ^[13] has located a saying of Abd al-Quddus of the Tariqah sect regarding Muhammad’s decision to return to earth: “I swear by God, had I reached that spot I would never have come back to earth.” ^[14] Muhammad returns to earth to die, as Mutahari later exposes, because prophets suffer for their people. The fact that Mutahari was a martyr lends authority to his opinion, but his explication demonstrates the desire to interpret the Mi’raj sacrificially.

Mimesis, Medina and the Jews

            The Jewish community held mimetic power over Muhammad and Arab society in general. Arab desire for a textual revelation precipitated the Recitation of the Quran. Muhammad’s people had interacted with Jews and Christians, and the spiritual knowledge and confidence the foreigners possessed impressed them. Muslims were initially just as conscious as the bedouin had been of the scattered, incoherent appearance their mystical religion gave off. Arabs knew Jews and Christians as the “peoples of the Book”, and longed for a holy writ of their own that would give their religion legitimacy. Muhammad’s devoted his life’s work partially to the creation of that very book, so mimesis and mythological reading apply themselves to an understanding of his biography with ease. Therefore, his relocation to Medina and the protective power of the Jews only increased his respect for them. The qibla ^[15] in the first Medinan mosque faced Jerusalem, and Muslims were assembled for prayer 3 times each day. Muhammad had begun to establish an imitative religion out of his respect for Hebrew tradition, but the negative repercussions of mimesis could not be stayed for long.

            Because of his respect for the recipients of the Torah, Muhammad took rejection at the hands of some Jews to heart and denied its effects as long as he was able. Jewish scholars questioned the validity of his prophethood, since they waited only for the fulfillment of the messianic promise and the return of the Paraclete. Muslims had difficulty responding to such learned criticism, for their newborn faith lacked a scholarly tradition of its own. The warm welcome extended mutually between the two communities soon thinned; jibes became harsher and were heard more frequently between them. ^[16]

            The governmental situation further complicated and escalated the destructive atmosphere. Before Muhammad’s arrival, the Jewish settlement had been in the process of choosing a ruler. Abdullah ibn Ubbay had reason to expect that the kingship would be offered to him as the leader of the most prominent Jewish sect, but the presence of the Muslims changed this. Eventually, his resentment became as overt as the insults hurled at Muslims during prayer. According to a Medinan Jew kindly disposed to warn Muhammad, “by God he thinks you have robbed him of a kingdom.” ^[17] Muhammad’s inadvertent challenge was imperiling the props of another community. Medinans on both sides of the religious fence threw their weight behind Ubbay since that wager seemed most likely to yield profit. Several Muslims had converted for reasons of convenience or the opportunities Islam afforded them. Their loyalty, shaken by the intensity of Jewish criticism and the Hijra, easily capitulated to more practical concerns. Jews who were initially friendly to Muhammad had no incentive to convert–they had a tradition of their own–and remained inside a comfortable demographic when sides were chosen.

            In the face of such resistance, the Prophet began to assert the unique identity of Islam. He brought Muslim myth of Ishmael and Abraham to the forefront of Arab history, claiming descent from Abraham equal in merit to that of Isaac’s sons. In a moment of inspiration, he rotated the direction of his followers’ prayers 180 degrees towards Mecca. The mimetic conflict over Medina approached its peak. Two separate religious communities, one with a history that imitated and envied the other, would soon resort to violence or betrayal to resolve their differences. Muhammad played a dangerous game to determine which community would be the sacrifice that allowed the other’s preservation. In the end, after the Battle of Uhud in 625, treason undid the Jews’ claim to power and peace when Muhammad discovered that the Jewish community had been contracting with the Meccans. At Uhud, the Muslim army suffered a disastrous defeat, and morale was at an all time low. By this time, the Jewish community was the more marginalized of the two Medinan sects. Muslims were eager to scapegoat them for the woes of war, and reasonable accusations abounded. The Battle of the Ditch provided a brief interruption, but probably only added fuel to the fire because of the Meccans’ persistence. Muhammad passed judgement: over 700 Jewish men were executed in the presence of the city’s populace, and their women and children sold into slavery. ^[18] The Jewish community was effectively obliterated in a setting populated and controlled by Muslims. Ibn Ishaq recorded Muhammad’s exclamation at the pronouncement of the Jews’ sentence by one of their own in Sira 689: “You have judged according to the very sentence of Allah above the seven skies.” ^[19] The executioners even managed to hide the faces of their victims. They reportedly bound them together in groups before beheading and immediately buried the corpses in a large ditch reminiscent of the trench that had earlier stayed the Meccan army. ^[20]

            The Muslim community rallied around the sacrifice–it demonstrated the authority Islam had gained and ultimately attracted others to Medina. Muhammad had ended the mimetic rivalry with his old protectors through violence. He remained, however, far from lasting peace or from any conclusion of the sacrificial system he participated in. And the Quraysh, though frustrated in battle, would continue to badger the Muslims, keeping Medina within the sacrificial systems’ reach.

Paradise Beyond Mecca

            After the Meccan community expelled the Prophet to Medina, neither party allowed the other to rest for long. Mecca was central to Muhammad’s developing spiritual vision; the hajj was essential to Islam and much of his intended community had lingered in Mecca–either in chains or out of uncertainty. He initially made a bold statement by attacking a Meccan caravan, waging war in the manner of his bedouin ancestors. His attack succeeded, and the Prophet upped the ante. Unfortunately, he miscalculated the strength of the Meccan resistance to another raid. The Battle of Badr resulted from a meeting of the two opposing parties, and the Muslims somehow garnered a remarkable victory against superior numbers. The Battles of Uhud and the Ditch followed some years after; Muhammad finally conquered Mecca, the object of his mimetic rivalry, outright in 630, after the Meccans defaulted on a treaty. ^[21]

            At this point, rudimentary analysis exposes the escalations of mimetic violence between the two Arab groups. The wars over Mecca were fought out of a mutual desire for the Holy City and are not unlike the modern grappling for Jerusalem. Just as in the case of the Medinan Jews, the conflict would eventually mandate the obliteration of one combatant. Luckily for Islam, Muhammad eventually triumphed and sacrificed or converted his opponents. ^[22]

            But this period in Islam’s history holds interest for a different reason: Muhammad was in the process of developing the sacrificial tradition of martyrdom for himself and his people. Hadith literature communicates the unfolding of Muhammad’s language of sacrifice through expressions of the lesser jihad. The Prophet knew that, in order to survive, Medinans would have to come to terms with battle. The Meccans, embittered by the struggle, desired the subordination of the Muslim community; Muhammad’s enemies had already demonstrated their willingness to fight. Personal sacrifice, typical in religious language and certainly not foreign to Muhammad’s persecuted community, began to take on the elements of war and martyrdom.

            Allah’s Apostle promised his people the rewards of heaven for their expressions of ultimate devotion. According to Al-Bukhari, one of the hadith’s most respected chroniclers, Muhammad reportedly said: “Whoever is wounded in Allah’s Cause....and Allah knows well who gets wounded in His Cause....will come on the day of Resurrection with his wound having the color of blood but the scent of musk.” ^[23] He preached to his people that Paradise could only be found “....under the shades of swords.” ^[24] Muhammad glorified jihad, which cannot avoid the connotations of martyrdom, as he realized the importance of his people’s sacrifice to their own survival as a community and to his goals for Islam:

A man came to Allah’s Apostle and said, “Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” He replied, “I do not find such a deed.” Then he added, “Can you, while the Muslim figher is in the battlefield, enter your mosque to perform prayers without cease and fast and never break your fast?” The man said, “But who can do that?” Abu-Huraira added, “The Mujahid is rewarded even for the footsteps of his horse while it wanders bout tied in a long rope.” ^[25]

The individual aspects of martyrdom, however, should not be overemphasized at the expense of the communal unity it espouses. Martyrdom relates to communal aspects of sacrifice because it is essentially a selfless act, perpetrated for the sake of the community’s galvanization. To this end, Muhammad broadened his concept of martyrdom into one that the entire umma could participate in. Anyone involved in the actions of a mujahid would be termed a martyr on the day of judgement. ^[26] Because this ideology was so important to the Muslims, Muhammad set a desirous example himself. The quote that follows actively incited his followers towards death in battle:

The Prophet said, “Were it not for so many men amongst the believers who dislike to be left behind me and whom I cannot provide with means of conveyance, I would certainly never remain beyind any Sariya’ (army unit) setting out in Allah’s Cause. By Him in Whose Hands my life is! I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred. ^[27]

The hadith claims that Muhammad was brave, heedless of swordsmen or archers, and describes perilous  incidents wherein he ecstatically shouts his message in the midst of battle. Muslims heeded the example. Umar, one of Muhammad’s closest companions, said, “O Allah, Grant me martyrdom in Your cause, and let my death be in the city of Your Apostle.” ^[28] What city is Umar referring too? The answer to that question is less important than what can be inferred from its reference. Umar wanted to be near Muhammad. The cult of veneration had already begun; the strength Muhammad’s example would soon approach Allah’s. But in spite of such devotion, Muhammad would not find peace for a religion that espoused Girard’s sacrificial system during his lifetime:

The Prophet said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, “There is no God but Allah” and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, .... and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist). ^[29]

Failing the Liar’s Test ^[30]

            Mythological uncertainty surrounds Muhammad’s death. Several different scholars of hadith with divergent narrations espouse conflicting versions of the story. Some traditions even disregard his death, especially Sufi sects which much prefer to focus on celebrating his birthday. However, persistent searching uncovers an incident when Muhammad is said to have eaten poisoned food given him by the Jews. ^[31] Examining the divergent accounts of this particular event yields theories which powerfully assent to the role of Muhammad in Girard’s sacrificial system, sometimes as a martyr, sometimes as sacrificer.

            In every account of the poisoning that is remotely thorough, a poisoned leg served by some facet of the Jewish community causes Muhammad’s death. ^[32] The only time frame given in any account mentions the defeat of the Khaibar (the final Jewish community who resisted Muhammad while he was in Medina) so, logically, Muhammad’s death can be interpreted as another stage in the mimetic conflict between the Jews and the Muslims. At this level of analysis, the Jews, or a single Jewess, victimized Muhammad whom they blamed for the ill that had befallen their community. His demise is then a feat of martyrdom at the hands of a community which gathers round to witness the “cutting of his jugular vein”, as he described his own condition in one of Ibn Sa’d’s accounts. ^[33]

            Yet the Jews create different problems with the method they choose to scapegoat Muhammad. In order to substantiate his guilt, every account but the most perfunctory ^[34] mentions the test the Jews/Jewess put to Muhammad by serving him the tainted meat: If Muhammad had been true, the poison would not have harmed him; if a liar, he would die. However, three accounts imbue this test with a more remarkable distinction. ^[35] In them, Muhammad’s death would signify his kingship. If the poison failed to affect him, the Jews/Jewess believed, the test confirmed his Prophethood. Therefore, the text, as quoted in Islamic hadith, first seems to work against itself. There are no remarks that attempt to invalidate the Jewess’ test, which Muhammad apparently fails. The hadith cannot suggest that Muhammad’s prophethood is invalid, so another, more satisfactory interpretation of the scenario’s result needs to be found.

            In reality, the Jewess’ experiment demonstrates that she had fundamentally misunderstood the nature of Muhammad’s prophethood. She believed Muhammad claimed to somehow be independently spiritually empowered. Perhaps the Muslims had conveyed this idea to her on their own, or perhaps she had weighed her perception of the Prophet against the Jewish messianic tradition and necessarily found him wanting. Whatever the case, her image of Muhammad fits precisely into the sacrificial system Girard claims for Christianity. If the two principle figures of each tradition are juxtaposed, according to Girard’s interpretation of the latter, Muhammad’s death would mark the beginning of the end of victimization in Islamic tradition. Muhammad’s death is sacrificial, and he wanted it to be cathartic ^[36] , but it could not slow the method his society  used to keep  mimesis in check.

            In the hadith, Muhammad is just as guilty of sin as any other member of his society. He delivered the Satanic verses, won and lost wars, and precipitated his poisoning by slaughtering the family of his murderer. ^[37] He even orders her execution in one version of the story. ^[38] The death of an admittedly innocent victim did not take place here. To be sure, he was mourned, but in the bloodbath of primitive Arabia where the concept of blood debt was ingrained in the mind of every clan member, the Jewess’ actions seem almost justified. In fact, if the Arabs had not been so divided among themselves for entirely unrelated reasons, his death may have even fused the community together and inflamed unified action against Islam’s oldest scapegoat, the Jews. But Muhammad’s death, as the relatively ordinary sacrifice of a martyr struggling for his community, does continue the pattern of sacrifice. Ultimately, his life and death catalyze new individual struggles to witness in the future of Islam.

Martyrdom and Jihad: Sunni Imitation

            Many patterns of imitation exist among the various traditions of Islam; the Shi’ite tradition contains the most remarkable of these. Muslims in this collection of sects venerate Husayn, their exemplary martyr, almost to the point of deification. So why focus singularly on Muhammad? Because he is central to every Muslim tradition, examinations of Muhammad generate authority, and Sunni theology contains the most direct references to the Prophet. If Muslims mimic his sacrificial example according to Girard’s theory, or any theory for that matter, then both the origins and implications of sacrifice in Islam become clearer.  Examination of a tradition that already contains a primary model, such as the Shi’ite, cannot attempt generalizations of the scope allowed by focusing on Sunni  thought and perhaps even Sufism, though few fundamentalist or revisionist models of Islam grow from mysticism.

            Muslims have a long tradition of venerating the prophet. Within 200 years of the Prophet’s death, descriptions of his physical appearance emerged. ^[39] Authors revered his impressive presence, beautiful hands, delightful fragrance, the hairs of his beard and head, and even the sweat that fell from his brow. The Prophet’s entrance into gardens made plants more vibrant; his shirts and coats possessed healing powers, and the North African historian al-Maqarri composed an entire book about his sandals. Muhammad’s kindness and humility are highlighted in most accounts, as is his love of animals. In short, later authors have developed libraries of accounts beyond the authority of the hadith that venerate Muhammad as a perfect Muslim example, in spite of his humanity, which is so emphasized in the Quran and hadith. ^[40]

            Such veneration does not necessarily constitute imitation, especially in the more orthodox Sunni tradition. But it does explain the roots of modern Muslims’ perception of Muhammad. Moving from rapturous visions of the Prophet’s visage to martyrdom and sacrifice for his sake constitutes a large leap–a leap that can nonetheless be made, as the examples below will show. Do martyrs actually take the communal guilt inherent to some part of all sacrifice upon themselves, ridding their sacrifiers of it through their death? Muhammad suffered for his people in like fashion as their intercessor: “Now hath an Apostle come unto you from among yourselves: your iniquities press heavily upon him.” ^[41] Muhammad’s sacrifice is inextricably woven into many versions of Islam around the globe; understanding that sacrifice draws closer to understanding the ideology, commitment, desperation, or emotion of Muslims sacrificing themselves today.     

Women’s Jihad in Afghanistan

            The language of jihad used to exhort Muslim women to sacrifice in Afghanistan and the figure of the Prophet revolve around each other. Audrey Shalinsky compiled a relevant selection of ethnography after living among Farghanachi refugees during the winter and spring of 1990. ^[42] In her article, women strive to maintain the unity and protect the honor of their families during times that do not require jihad. However, in times of jihad, their loyalty may have to be redirected. When the community is threatened, Afghan tradition exhorts them to “help the Prophet”, perhaps even at the expense of their own families and kin. ^[43] The language that describes  their new focus almost always centers on Muhammad. Tapes, heard repeatedly in many communal and private settings, convey this message to the female populace.

            Aiding the Prophet involves sacrifice. Shalinsky’s language almost exactly parallels Girard’s here: “Aql’ is expressed by a woman willing to sacrifice herself and her kin during the time of jihad.” ^[44] Aql’, which literally translated means “reason”, attaches itself irrevocably to the preservation of the group’s unity in Farghanachi ideology. Thus a woman’s sacrifice, which is tied to the community’s well-being, depends on the Prophet for inspiration. In fact, women perform their parts in jihad almost entirely with respect to the enemies of Islam and the Prophet. Farghanachi women discuss the ideas of jihad and shahada almost daily, and Shalinsky claims that descriptions of Muhammad and the anticipation of martyrdom inform these conversations. ^[45] In a powerful anecdote Shalinsky calls “the clearest lesson of proper mujahid (struggle)”, she recounts the story of Nasia:

While she was involved in the battle one of her sons got wounded and came to her. He fell down in front of her. The Prophet (peace be upon him) called up on her and said, “Mother! Nasia!” She replied, “[I am your] sacrifice. May my father and mother be your sacrifice. Oh master, what is your command?” The Prophet (peace be upon him) [said], “Brave woman of Islam....Put some ointment on your son’s wounds.” Nasia took her scarf, tore a piece of it, bound up the wound of her son and said, “My dear son, I see your pulse is still beating....Fight the unbelievers until the time you have given your life for Islam. Until that time you have not sacrificed yourself for Islam. ^[46]

Unbelievers eventually killed the boy. Nasia split his murderer in half with a sword. The story is remarkable because she literally sacrifices her son for the sake of the Prophet and leaves the reader with no doubt that she would willingly sacrifice herself as well. Today, women pray for the strength to emulate the examples of both Nasia and the Prophet in the violent, bloody upheavals that have scarred their country for decades.

            Furthermore, in an amazing reversal of the typical sacrificial pattern, the Prophet and the community also depend on women in Farghanachi myth. Hamza, a martryed Muslim, has a daughter named Fatima that Muhammad agrees to care for. The Prophet receives a revelation upon taking the grieving child into his arms; the revelation tells him that, through the daughter’s just actions and assent to the death of her father, he (Muhammad) has been granted the right to intercede for the umma at the last judgement. Though Shalinsky does not make all the metaphysical connections of the story clear, it is obvious that Fatima benefitted both the prophet and the community through the unwitting sacrifice of her father and her own faithfulness. If she had been resistant to either half of her task, she might have jeopardized the forgiveness of her community’s sins. ^[47]

Living Hadith in Northern India

            Barbara Metcalf writes of an Islamic movement towards spiritual renewal which models itself after the Prophet in its own unique manner. The Tablighi Jama’at grew from Sufi roots and relies on the hadith with an intensity similar to that in Sunnism–the movement’s fundamental principles are all drawn from sharia law and their own collection of hadith. Maulana Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhalawi compiled the Tabligh collection of hadith between 1928 and 1940. They are called the Tablighi nisah, or the Tabligh Curriculum, and smack of mysticism only because of the selectivity that determined their inclusion. ^[48]

            Like their fellow Muslims in Afghanistan, Tablighi adherents have a relatively strong sense of jihad. Women and men alike are encouraged to struggle for Islam as their persons permit; sacrifice made in the interests of the community has metaphysical primacy over all other expressions of devotion. Due to the Sufi influences acting on the movement, these Muslims emphasize a love of the Prophet over imitating his sacrifice, overtly or otherwise. A relational component initially appears to be more important than any mimicry. Instead, the Tablighi cache potent manifestations of the movement’s desire to imitate Muhammad in a different location.

            The movement espouses depressing views of the present. As a result of this pessimistic view, jihad has become the Tablighi’s method of acting on their reality. Their mujahidin do not as easily resort to violence as the Muslims in more militant sects, but the model for their concept of sacrifice is Muhammad’s own community, specifically the Medinan community. The descriptions of jihad the Tablighi nisah contains the terminology of a community threatened by physical extermination. Members participate in patrols, forays and excursions as small military units, and the leader is known as an “amir”, a word that contains military and political connotations. The Tablighi copied these elements directly from hadith into their own sacred writ. In fact, each time a member of the community leaves home, they are encouraged to think of the departure as a hijra, or pilgrimage to a metaphorical Medina. ^[49]

            The Tablighi simulation of Medina’s violent settlement does not end there. Their conception of hadith, when examined, only makes the connection between Muhammad’s sacrifice and their own clearer. Metcalf writes:

Printed texts in the Tabligh, as well as in all cases considered here, not only communicated the teachings of the movements but shaped the organization and experience of the movement as well. To speak of “living hadith,” as my title suggests, has a double meaning. Followers attempt to live by hadith but in such a way that they aspire to internalize the written/heard texts to the point that they ideally become, in a sense, “living hadith.” ^[50]

By extrapolation, the Tabligh, by literally “becoming” hadith, engage in the most complete sense of imitation possible. However, it is more difficult, especially from the limited information in Metcalf’s ethnography, to identify a party that plays the role of the scapegoat in Tabligh society. If they take their mimicry of Muhammad far enough, they could possibly fill that role as martyrs, but solid conclusions remain elusive in this area. Their founding myth emphasizes the stupidity and ignorance (jahiliyya) of the Indians who were initially converted to Islam. The Medinan community either expelled or executed those it scapegoated according to Hubert and Mauss’ definition of sacrifice. Perhaps, as I have suggested, conversion deserves inclusion in that definition as well. Whatever the case, their founder himself utilizes the Medinan community, the epitome of a war-prone settlement in Arabia, as his model. Hence, because Muhammad’s life was so visibly sacrificial, their war-like actions represent a desire for sacrifice that remains infinitely in Girard’s mimetic cycle. In Tabligh society, just as in the case of the Farghanachi, expressions of a sacrificial system live on.

Hamas and Neglected Duty

            The Palestinian resistance movement which wages terrorism on Israel claims ideological descent from the Muslim Brotherhood and Hasan al-Banna, himself a martyr. Hamas was founded in 1988 on the winds of the intifada and has since used the language and military expression of jihad in an attempt to liberate Palestine. ^[51] Unlike in the two previous case-studies I have cursorily undertaken, Hamas’ references to Muhammad’s sacrificial example expressed in jihad are clear. In fact, such rhetoric undergirds the movement’s mission. Their charter, or the Hamas Covenant, explains their devotion to Muhammad in certain terms.

            In the 36 article document, Hamas claims that their leader is the Prophet three times. Through his example, he guides the organization’s members in their resistance. When combined with Hamas’ propensity to acts of suicidal violence, both against Jews and against Arabs who disagree with their orthodox creed, the Prophet’s capacity here is striking. According to the charter, the souls of mujahidin fighting for Palestine will gather together with the souls of the Prophet’s own martyred companions. These mujahidin believe they continue a struggle begun by the Prophet over the holy land 1,300 years ago; they struggle against Israel because of the holy sites it contains. The Covenant lists only two such sites, both of which are directly connected to the Prophet’s life: the first qibla (a reference to Jerusalem) and the third Holy Sanctuary (where Muhammad departed Jerusalem during the Mi’raj). ^[52]

            Hamas also absorbs a hadith concerning Muhammad’s desire to become a martyr. ^[53] However, neither  Sahih al-Bukhari, the original chronicler, or Muhammad, who is responsible for the quote, receive mention in the charter. Hamas intends to claim the description of martyrdom, followed by resurrection and martyrdom ad infinitum, as its own. They have “become” the Prophet in another sense and can assimilate his words as well as his struggle. It is therefore difficult to believe their most lauded members have not also assimilated the Prophet’s end.

            Hamas’ martyrs scapegoat themselves in authentic Girardian style. The martyrdom they desire crystalizes their sacrifical image. Article 32 of the Covenant describes the Muslims of Palestine as the victims of “World Zionism” and “Imperialist” powers. According to the article, these malevolent forces aim for the worldwide destruction of Islam. As the world’s spiritual epicenter, Palestine must be their first objective. If Zionism is successful in taking Palestine, the Covenant claims, it will spread across the globe. ^[54] Thus, Hamas’ members struggle against overwhelming odds; they have made opponents of everyone. To be fair, the reader must recognize that some precedent for such extreme actions and statements exists in the hadith. Many scholars quote the Prophets words on war’s inherent deceptions. Whether intentionally or not, such passages communicate that ultimate, transcendent means justify all ends. Palestine’s forces are and have been woefully under-equipped compared to the Israelis’. In a sense, they have nothing effectual left to give but the ultimate sacrifice. Sadly, those sacrifices, as Girard contends, have done little to shift the balance of power in the West Bank and Gaza in either direction. Martyrs will continue to be demanded again and again, perhaps more often than Muhammad himself would have been willing to die.

            Obviously, not all sacrificial corpses on the hands of Islamic militants were mujahidin. Most of these victims go to the grave inconspicuously in the text of Western daily papers. Anwar Sadat, the president of Egypt in October 1981, refused this anonymity. His assassins left behind a pamphlet called “The Neglected Duty”, in which they justified their action. The pamphlet’s creed, which asserts many of the things contained in the Hamas Covenant, does the community of Islam a valuable service. The pamphlet divulges one of martyrdom’s purposes, which happens to fit nicely into Girard’s theory. Sadat’s assassins quote a hadith wherein every Muslim who is killed, no matter how, becomes a martyr. ^[55] If any member of the community can participate in the sacrifice, any member of the community can benefit from the sacrifice. These martyrs unify their communities around them.      

Father of the Ancestral Mission

            Hasan al-Banna founded an Egyptian organization called the Muslim Brotherhood in 1929. The Brotherhood has spawned many different Islamic militant organizations since its inception, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Jama’a. In his early life, al-Banna witnessed British colonialism in Egypt. Like many Muslims, the authority possessed by European infidels shamed him. His education later gave him an outlet for his frustrations by exposing him to Islamic revivalism and fundamentalism in college. ^[56]   Al-Banna began publishing independently, and several of his tracts quote from the particularly militant hadith mentioned above. ^[57] These hadith glorify martyrdom and name the Prophet as their inspiration. ^[58] The Brotherhood further reflected his frustration by using jihad to counteract anti-Islamic influence in society. Al-Banna’s understanding of the Brotherhood’s purpose invokes the Prophet’s exemplary status in accomplishing the “Ancestral Mission.” ^[59] That mission, according to Sana Abed-Kotob, involves several different elements, the first and second of which are a “call from the Qur’an and Sunna (tradition and example) of the Prophet Muhammad; a method that adheres to the Sunna.” ^[60]

            Abdel Azim Ramadan has examined this “call” in greater detail. He writes that Brotherhood strategies for implementing social, economic, religious, and political change operate in three stages: the call, emigration, and holy war. Other Muslim societies, believing themselves oppressed, have developed doctrines of emigration to environments more suitable for nurturing their faith. But the complete, three-part creed expressed by the Brotherhood emulates the Prophets example more closely. It is intended to copy the chronology of Muhammad’s own life, beginning with his da’wa (supernatural call), suffering the necessity of the hijra and culminating in jihad. In Ramadan’s words, “The fighting would begin defensively and end offensively.” ^[61] Al-Banna viewed Islam as the enactor of social change. In fact, Muhammad’s emphasis on social justice encapsulates al-Banna’s ideology, and al-Banna, conscious of the example his Prophet set, utilized the same methodology to achieve egalitarianism. His system’s communal emphasis is unique; it demands sacrifice from entire Muslim societies. 

Sayyid Qutb and Christ

            Like al-Banna, Sayd Qutb created blueprints of sacrifice that fundamentalist organizations would eventually integrate with their own developing philosophies. Among others, his writings are cited by the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Jihad, and various branches of Pakistan’s Islamic movement. On the surface, he embraces the language of revolution; his concept of jihad often addressed social upheaval. The revolt he envisioned was comprehensive. He desired political, economic, social, and religious systems that had been demolished and rebuilt by Islam, so his writings include many discussions of jihad and the Prophet’s example. ^[62] But all of the other organizations, movements, and sects examined above possess these basic qualities. Qutb is unique because he intuits Girard’s sacrificial system. His comments on the nature of Jesus’ death and his descriptions of the Prophet as human display his understanding of the nature of struggle, community, and sacrifice.

            In his book, Islam: The Religion of the Future, Qutb notes that Quranic conclusions to the story of Jesus do not contain descriptions of his death. Instead, Jesus merely ascends to heaven. ^[63] Some Muslim traditions actually hold the crucifixion to be a fabricated account. In any case, something about Jesus’ murder is clearly avoided in Muslim myth and specifically in Qutb’s own work. Qutb addresses this omission in Social Justice in Islam:

So the Qur’an keeps reminding people that this Prophet Muhammad is human like other humans, and Muhammad himself kept repeating this point, that he was a prophet beloved and venerated by his people and it was to be feared that this love and veneration would turn into deification or sanctification, such as was due only to God. ^[64]

The key to understanding Qutb’s comments on both Muhammad and Jesus lies in the quotation’s final two clauses. Deification is to be ascribed only to God. Muslim accounts of Jesus, as noted by Qutb, remove both the discovery of Jesus’ innocence and the possibility of his resurrection by substituting an ascension story. Jesus’ sacrifice marked the end of Girard’s mimetic system because humans are incapable of scapegoating victims whose innocence they have perceived. Qutb implies that the Quran and hadith wisely attempt to avoid this error. His Prophet remains human and is sacrificed just like all the previous prophets in Muslim tradition, for ideals more perfect that himself–the community of Islam and Allah. Qutb distances Muhammad from the suicidal sacrifice of the god Hubert and Mauss postulate. ^[65] Had Qutb deified his Prophet, he would have dealt with the end of the sacrificial system as described by Girard.

Conclusion

            In modern Islam, Muhammad’s death must be sacrificial in order to completely perpetuate Girard’s mimetic system. But his followers must have the capacity to imitate him. The examples above demonstrate the results of a tradition of veneration and verify Girard’s fundamental mimetic thesis: humans imitate the things we desire or to achieve the things we think we desire. Muslims naturally seek to imitate the Prophet whose faith birthed their own. Muhammad was the original Muslim who knew his faith best. His charisma, even his humanity, continues to draw his people closer to him. Muslims may, in fact, judge the veracity of Muhammad’s exemplary tradition with emotion rather than with theological reasoning. The tapes of hadith played in Farghanachi marketplaces often elicit tears, even on the parts of those familiar with the stories. ^[66] But sentiment’s role in a decision to sacrifice cannot invalidate the sacrifice itself, question Muhammad’s exemplary role, or affect the victim’s sacrality.

            Muhammad’s companions, the first to duplicate his sacrifice, enjoyed the luxury of frequent fights between comparable forces on a relatively large scale. A martyr’s death was easy to come by for a determined warrior, and hadith establishes martyrdom’s necessity to the Prophet’s idea of sacrifice. Modern Muslims often have to extend this concept of martyrdom: they cannot afford pitched battles, weapons are difficult to obtain, and the odds against them are overwhelming. So they resort to the suicidal murders of innocents. The Hamas Covenant, quoted above, discloses the helplessness they feel, though, I believe, it never sufficiently justifies their actions. ^[67]

            As Sayyid Qutb implies, Muhammad’s sacrifice as an ordinary human being only perpetuates the Girardian mimetic system. The fact that Muslims have made this sacrifice exemplary highlights the longevity of Girard’s theory. Sacrificial traditions rejuvenate Islamic community. Muslim extensions of the concept of martyrdom to suicidal murder comprise another facet of this tradition. Modern Islamic martyrs take the escalation of mimetic violence to an incomprehensible extreme by perpetrating shocking violence against vulnerable members of rival communities. I have asked whether martyrs assimilate the guilt of their community like the sacrifices described by Hubert and Mauss. A communal gathering around the sacrificed victim, perhaps only in effigy, could be termed an unconscious admission of guilt. Thus, members do not mourn only for the deceased, but perhaps also for their own role in the horror of their sacrifice. Muslim militants, such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, thereby intensify the violence of subsequent acts and provide Girard’s mimetic system with springboards to jump from. As the world has seen in Palestine during the last two weeks (and as Sadat’s assassins showed), martyrs cannot appease sacrifice’s appetite for blood. Just as Muhammad preserved the sacrificial system by maintaining his mortality and demanding the sacrifice of jihad, modern mujahidin whet mimesis’ deadly desire using more severe means. 

            I cannot answer whether Islam would cling to a sacrificial model that is sometimes destructive if Muslims held non-violent perceptions of Muhammad. Other elements of all Muslim traditions suggest otherwise. Shi’ites venerate the martyred Husayn, and Sufi’s are known for acts of mystical sacrifice across the globe. Even Sunnis extol Ishmael’s brush with sacrifice at his father’s hands, venerating Abraham’s choice of the ram instead, which their branch of Islam continues to reenact today on the fifth day of the hajj. I have misgivings about the Christian faith’s ability to disable the mimetic system, even through forgiveness. Human nature may require sacrifice in some form, no matter how our morals scream against it. If, as Girard claims, an inaugural murder founds culture, communities may be unable to dispense with it.  Thanks to the apocalypse, Christianity has not deprived itself of ultimate resolution, in spite of the hope Girard claims the faith offers. In fact, the day of judgement is present in both Christianity and Islam, and both of their principle figures potentially have redemptive roles to play. I sincerely hope that, in the end, absolute, system-ending forgiveness is not the singular luxury of God.

           
Works Cited

A. Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad. London, 1955.

Abdel Azim Ramadan. “Fundamentalist Influence in Egypt: The Strategies of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Takfir Groups” Fundamentalisms and the State. ed. Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993.

Abdul Hamid Siddique. Selections from Hadith. Safat, Kuwait: Islamic Book Publishers, 1983.

Ahmad S. Moussalli. Radical Islamic Fundamentalism: The Ideological and Political Discourse of Sayyid      Qutb. Beirut, Lebanon: The American University of Beirut, 1992.

Annemarie Schimmel. And Muhammad is His Messenger. ed. Charles Long, Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1985.

Audrey C. Shalinsky. “Women’s Roles in the Afghanistan Jihad” International Journal of Middle East          Studies. 25.4 (1993): 661-675.

Barbara D. Metcalf. “Living Hadith in the Tablighi Juma’at” Journal of Asian Studies. 52.3 (1993): 584-608.

Beverly Milton-Edwards. “The Concept of Jihad and the Palestinian Islamic Movement: A Comparison of Ideas and Techniques” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies. 19.1 (1992): 48-53.

“Charter of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) of Palestine” Journal of Palestine Studies. trans. Muhammad Maqdsi, 22.4 (1993): 122-134.

Christina Phelps Harris. Nationalism and Revolution in Egypt: The Role of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Hague/London/Paris: Mouton and Co., 1964.

Hasan al-Banna. Five Tracts of Hasan Al-Banna trans. and ed. Charles Wendell, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 1978.

Hasan al-Banna. “Risalat al-Mu’tamar al-Khamis” Sislsilat sawt al-Haqq. 5 (1997): 18.

Henri Huber and Marcel Mauss. Sacrifice: Its Nature and Function. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1964.

Ibn Sa’d. Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir. quoted in Silas. The Death of Muhammad. 7 March 2002 <http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/mo-death.htm>.  

Johannes J.G. Jansen. The Neglected Duty. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986.

Karen Armstrong. Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet. New York: Harper Collins, 1993.

Meir Hatina. Islam and Salvation in Palestine. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 2001. Includes selections of the Islamic Jihad’s Internal Charter in appendix.

Morteza Mutahari. The Human Being in the Qoran. trans. Hossein Vahid Dastjerdi, ed. Somayyeh Hossainmardi. Tehran, Iran: Ministry of Islamic Guidance, 1981.

Muhammad ‘Abd al-Salam Faraj. Al-Faridah al-Ghaibah. trans. Johannes J.G. Jansen. Quoted as appendix in Johannes J.G. Jansen. The Neglected Duty. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1986.

Muhammad Iqbal. The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam.  Lahore: Ashraf Press, 1962.

Rene Girard. The Scapegoat. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1996. 

Sahih Bukhari. 3.786, quoted in Silas. The Death of Muhammad. 7 March 2002 <http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/mo-death.htm>.

Sahih Al-Bukhari. The Islamic Interlink. trans. M. Muhsin Khan, 3 March 2002 <http://www.ais.org/~islam/subject/hadith.html>.

Sana Abed-Kotob. “The Accommodationists Speak: Goals and Strategies of the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt” International Journal of Middle East Studies. 27.3 (1995): 321-339.

Sayyid Qutb. Islam: The Religion of the Future. Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Qalam Press, publication date not included.

Sunan Abu-Dawud. Book 14, No. 2526 Islamic Server of MSA, USC. trans. Ahmad Hassan. 4 March, 2002 <http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunna/abudawud/014.sat.html>.

Tabari. History. Vol. 8 123-124, quoted in Silas. The Death of Muhammad. 7 March 2002 <http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/mo-death.htm>.

The Koran. trans. N.J. Dawood, London: Penguin Books, 2000.

“The Last Sermon of the Prophet,” published online by Univeristy of Delaware Muslim Students Association, 7 March 2002  <udel.edu/stu-org/msaud/ISLAM/lastsermon.html>.

 William E. Shepard. Sayyid Qutb and Islamic Activism. Leiden, Netherlands: E.J. Brill, 1996. Includes a copy of Sayyid Qutb’s Social Justice in Islam, trans. William E. Shepard.

Ziad Abu-Amr. Islamic Fundamentalism in the West Bank and Gaza. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1994.