Peter Townsend’s New Revelation About The Prophet

Muslims everywhere in the world take the Quran and the Hadiths very seriously. They attempt to live according to the prescriptions of these texts.

The Islamic scriptures inform us that the Prophet Muhammad altered the text of the Quran that had been allegedly revealed to him by Allah and as a consequence Allah killed him. This is the startling finding of Peter Townsend in Questioning Islam: Tough Questions & Honest Answers About the Muslim Religion (Kindle location 1,840-2,000).

bookTownsend arrives at this inference after a careful and critical examination of the primary scriptures of Islam, namely the Quran and the Hadiths. Here, I present Townsend’s compelling findings in a paraphrase as good as verbatim along with my analysis.

Abdullah Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abi Sarh was an early and enthusiastic follower of Muhammad. He had been recruited as a scribe to record the revelations Muhammad received from Allah. Those revelations would constitute the Quran.

After an initial period of enthusiasm, Ibn Abi Sarh became disillusioned. The reason was that he would suggest changes to and rewording of the revelations from Allah as transmitted by Muhammad. The prophet readily accepted those suggestions. Even though the Quran (6:115, 18:27) emphatically announces that the revelations cannot be altered, the ease with which Ibn Abi Sarh’s alterations were accepted eventually disillusioned him. Therefore, he apostatized from Islam.

Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad’s earliest biographer, informs us that Muhammad wasn’t pleased with this daring act of apostasy. The Quran (e.g., 4:88-89) prescribes the death sentence for apostasy. Therefore, Muhammad ordered Ibn Abi Sarh to be killed.

Ibn Abi Sarh had earned Muhammad’s ire for yet another reason as well. After apostatizing, he produced verses that mimicked the quranic revelations. The Quran (2:23) claims that its perfectly formed verses were revelations from Allah and that no human being could ever produce anything like those.

In the Quran, Allah even challenges any human to produce verses like those. This claim bestowed legitimacy upon the Quran as divine revelation. So, predictably, Muhammad was irate that Ibn Abi Sarh could produce verses like that. If the people of Arabia couldn’t distinguish between the verses that Allah had revealed and the ones that Ibn Abi Sarh produced then naturally Muhammad’s prophetic career was in jeopardy.

Ibn Abi Sarh’s death sentence was later commuted under the strangest of circumstances. Ibn Ishaq informs us that Ibn Abi Sarh had been condemned to death but he went into hiding. The person who had hidden him appealed to Muhammad to commute the death sentence. After a long silence, Muhammad agreed and Ibn Abi Sarh went away.

After he left, the associates of Muhammad asked him why he remained silent for a long time when the appeal was made to commute Ibn Abi Sarh’s death sentence. Muhammad replied, “I kept silent because I hoped one of you might get up and strike off his head!” (Guillaume, A.: The Life of Muhammad – A Translation of Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, p. 550).

In any case, it was imperative that Muhammad initiated a damage control exercise to allay suspicion that he had altered the verses that Allah had revealed. So, Allah sent a new revelation (Quran 69:44-46): “And if the messenger were to invent any sayings in our name, we should certainly seize him by his right hand, and we should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart (aorta).”

The implication of this quranic verse is clear. If Muhammad were to die through the cutting of his aorta then he is guilty of modifying the quranic revelations. How did Muhammad die?

Muhammad had earlier waged a brutal war against the Jewish tribe at the Battle of Khaybar. There was a widespread massacre of Jewish men after which Muhammad ordered the female survivors to cook the victorious Muslim jihadis a sumptuous meal.

A Jewish woman named Zainab avenged the slaughter of her people by serving Muhammad poisoned meat. Muhammad had ingested some of the meat before he realized that it had been poisoned. Even though he recovered, the effects of poisoning lingered on until he died.

Two important and authentic hadiths shed light on the deathbed utterances of Muhammad. Sahih Bukhari (5:59:713) reports the following as among the last words of Muhammad: “O Aisha! I still feel the pain caused by the food I ate at Khaybar, and at this time, I feel as if my aorta is being cut from that poison.”

Sunan Abu Dawud (4498) reports the following as among the last words of Muhammad: “I continue to feel the pain from the morsel which I had eaten at Khaybar. This is the time when it has cut off my aorta.”

Allah had warned in the Quran that if Muhammad were to alter the quranic verses revealed to him he would die by having his aorta cut off. The hadiths inform that is exactly how Muhammad died. Therefore, one must inevitably conclude that Muhammad had altered what Allah had revealed to him.

Muslims everywhere in the world take the Quran and the Hadiths very seriously. They attempt to live according to the prescriptions of these texts. I am not sure that the compilers of the Hadiths, Sahih Bukhari and Sunan Abu Dawud, who lived closer to the time of Muhammad, were serious believers.

Did they see through the charade that Muhammad had enacted and hence left telltale evidence that would later on discredit him? Did they manufacture these hadiths after coming across the quranic verse with the intent of discrediting Muhammad and Islam? Were they closet pagans who didn’t want to risk their lives by resisting Islam openly? Were they secretly enjoying the practical joke they were playing on the nascent but fanatical Islamic umma at the expense of the prophet of Allah secure in the belief that the blind followers of Islam wouldn’t discover it in the lifetime of the compilers of the hadiths? These interesting questions would be pursued at a later date.

An embarrassed Islamic apologist may be tempted to argue that the Hadiths are untrustworthy. It is true that some hadiths have been considered spurious in the Islamic tradition whereas the rest have been accepted as authentic. However, as Townsend points out, many of the core teachings of Islam would be unintelligible but for the Hadiths.

The Quran, for example, contains no reference to the shahada, which is central to Islamic belief. It is only the Hadiths that illustrate such core beliefs and practices. Therefore, the Hadiths have always been the core scriptures of Islam. They cannot be expediently discounted. Even more pertinently, the episode narrated here comes from two of the Hadith collections that the Muslims venerate as authentic.

Ironically, Muhammad incriminated himself, perhaps with the unsolicited help of the compilers of the hadiths, like no other prophet before and after him ever had.

Kalavai Venkat is a Silicon Valley-based writer, an atheist, a practicing orthodox Hindu, and author of the book “What Every Hindu should know about Christianity.”
  • Zohrab

    There is another version of the story, Pls click ….
    The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History will also be helpful to some.

  • Math Genius

    So you mean to say Allah is God.

  • Tiruvalluvar

    What hogwash by Townsend. He is ending up as an apologist of the desert god.

  • Sameep

    It’s a futile exercise. The analysis leads to a paradox: Muhammad dying due to poisoning proves that Allah is the only true god and some part of Quran is divinely revealed. But then why would omniscient Allah appoint a man who would later invent some of his own verses, as his final prophet?

    There are much better way to discredit Islam. Let’s not trivialize the urgent necessity to critique Islam by coming up with such phoney analysis.

    • Tiruvalluvar

      Kalavai ended up wasting his time on this nonsense.

      • Samrat Bharat

        What else to expect from someone so confused, he calls himself “an atheist, a practicing orthodox Hindu”?

  • Jitendra Desai

    It is futile to try and convince Muslims with such research.Non Muslims in any case are more concerned about their present, in the company of 160 crore adherants of Islam.Non Muslims could be more worried about their own aortas with so many Jihadis lurking around.

    • Jishnu

      Hindus are concerned about everything except their survival – the correctness in “painting all muslims with same brush”, fake human rights, not attacking the “whole community because of few bad apples”, political correctness, fake secularism, fake equality, fake reasons for self-improvement and fake introspection. Hindus as a group are the ones with least commonsense and survival instinct today. That they should be more worried about their battles than others’ doctrinal accuracy is not something Hindus are in a state to think today. The first sign of a decadent civilization.

      • Jitendra Desai

        Thanks for your response.Hindus are the only people since the dawn of human civilization, who are still around as Hindus.It will be terrible for Hindus to emulate Muslims or Christians or their religions or their culture.It will be a miracle of history if Islam can survive in its present form beyond this century.Church is almost dead in its birthplace.Hindus may appear decadent to some adherants of Hindu way of life, but for enlightened non Hindus, Hindu way of life appears better than what they have been brought up with.

        • Jishnu

          That to me is more a problem than a respite. Non-Hindus find Hindu way better yet they digest Hinduism to use its best and deny it its existence. The way west kept doing for centuries. Hinduism surviving those dark centuries is not evidence that it will in future, because when it survived the survival instinct showed – today it does not show. Neither at the knowledge level not at the valor level. And history tells that civilizations became decadent when they start showing these signs.

          • harish parasuraman

            Jishnu Ji,
            Thank you so much. If there’s someone who’s learnt immensely from your posts, it’s me. Please keep contributing. hariH Om.:)

          • Jishnu

            Thank you for the kind words, sir 🙂

          • Jitendra Desai

            Thanks again.Agree with the points that you have made about Hindus.May be the saviours of our way of life are born but are in their craddles or are in schools.Reason why we don’t see them.Or we see very few of them.Other day I watched this. This man has passion for our history though it is not his profession.Just figure what is it that is driving such young people to such “searches” ? There in lies our hope.

          • Jishnu

            For the time and scale of the civilization decadence is not to be seen in terms of rise or fall in one generation, though one generation makes significant difference. The generation that is in 30’s & 40’s now was better positioned in many ways, but in terms of knowledge we only weakened. That is because the traditional link is broken – the new generation is even more disadvantaged in terms of real knowledge, it will be in a reinventing phase.

            That said, there is never loss of hope and I am not trying to foresee distant future. This is what it stands today.

          • Jitendra Desai

            Agree with you about rather bleak present times for Hindus. 60 crore odd young Hindus are our only hope.You are right about Hindus in their forties, fifties, sixties & seventies having missed the bus.Many of them are to be found in secular riff raff and other phony pursuits.While young Hindus appear very focussed on whatever they are doing.Consider “waste Bengal” – where Hindus are yet to learn the lessons of Hindu unity.But then consider the work of two Bengalee younth, we are aware of – Sanjeev Sanyal & Hindol Sengupta…. also consider what Bengalees like Tapan Ghosh are doing.Bengal is under serious attack by anti Hindu forces.It is Bengal that has thrown up these young men.Expect similar “bursts” from Kerala.It is very puzzling – but it has been happening – through millenia – a generation arrives to rejuvenate and liberate Hindu way of life.That generation appears to be round the corner – after 1000 years.

          • Rajalakshmi J

            ///Non-Hindus find Hindu way better yet they digest Hinduism to use its best and deny it its existence///

            So true.

          • Time Is Up

            Jitendra Desai – Let us be honest and I hope I will be proven wrong in future. If Hinduism’s time as come that it cannot handle onslaught from other aggressive faiths due to its inherent weakness in standing strong, Hinduism may morph or worst case become near extinct like Bahai’s or the Parsi faiths.

      • Time Is Up

        I agree with you about, Hindus lack the “survival” instincts. Even after 800 years of rule by Islam, they did not learn and kept on singing “Eeshwar Allah Tero Naam” crap, while the Muslims kept on laughing and continued their genocide and conquering land. I would not be surprised that Hindus by end of this century, will be like the Jews with Moses and later, looking for land to live, or begging like the Rohingyas. Because Hindus have a foolish idea of “Sarva Dharma Samabhav” another crap, which again Muslims debunked by their actions.

  • Luffy

    I appreciate Mr. Townsend’s extensive research but I doubt if it helps much. Most of us Non-Zombies know that God isn’t so stupid to command all that is written in the Zombie Book. As far as Zombies go they don’t care either way. They love raping, torturing and murdering Non-Zombies.

    There is just one important lesson to learn from all this. Next time anyone says he hears voices in his head please send him to mental asylum. Do not make a prophet out of him.

    • Rahul Singh

      Sadly, what else to expect?/ by conservative estimates Mohammadans (both Arab Muslims and non-Arab Mawalis) are 70% or thereabouts inbred – result of marriages between first cousins, aunts, neices (and God know who else). Which means at the very basic genetic levels, every generation more retarded and degenerate than the previous ones.
      You have so rightly pointed out it doesn’t matter what stares right in the faces of these brain dead zombies seeking vengeance for being born.

      • Time Is Up

        I understand that there are “cousin” marriages. However the 70% number, how did you arrive at that? Do you have something to back it up?

        • Rahul Singh

          Mostly UK based studies of migrant Muslim populations from a diverse geographical backgrounds. Keep getting published in news papers too. Hence easy to check. The last I read was about the Mirpuri, Pakistanis in England (largest group amongst the Subcontinental Muslims) which had figures pegged at approx 60%… In India where the second largest population of Muslims, close to 200 million plus live, there are no studies but most Muslim marriages are in-family.
          The economically weaker Muslims prefer such marriages even more for various reasons but the tradition is introduced by Islam and sustained by its teaching which otherwise is absolutely rejected by indigenous faith and cultural traditions (except a tiniest of tiny cases in isolated groups) which still form the overwhelming majority of the country.