Bismika Alllahuma

题为的书 Hagarism ： 制造伊斯兰教的世界 问题关于一切穆斯林相信作为历史真相。 它质询共同的信仰Qur’显露了对先知Muhammad在22年(610-632)中在麦加和Medina。 反而，书主张Qur’在叙利亚或伊拉克，超过五十年组成了，可能在先知以后？s死亡，射出及时和归因于先知。 Qur’，根据书，被制造在王朝Caliph期间Abdul Malik (685-705 C.E.)使一个扩展帝国合法。

书也主张词“穆斯林”在第8个世纪被发明替换词 Muhajirun (移民)，是阿拉伯社区的原始的名字征服巴勒斯坦并且修造岩石的圆顶。 书为早期穆斯林规定一个新的名字。 它叫他们 Hagarenes即，亚伯拉罕生物后裔由Hagar。 这种族命名早期穆斯林被使用与犹太人区别他们，是亚伯拉罕后裔由萨拉。 Hagarism书？s标题，是类似诬蔑和可能种族主义者，描述早期穆斯林历史现象的标签。

在作者？ 拥有词，书被写 “由异教徒为异教徒”。 对古兰经的攻击？s真实性，先知？s正直或者伊斯兰教的历史不是新的。 当古兰经显露时，古兰经承认相似的攻击不轻信者被制作。 为更多比一一千年，西部奖学金被确定暴露什么它认为是 “欺骗基础” 回教。 这样， Hagarism 是另外书在攻击文学大转储。

然而，什么区别这本书是事实那 它的作者、迈克尔厨师和Patricia老太婆，不再订阅到它的重要研究结果。 在2006年4月3日，我有一次电话交谈与迈克尔厨师，并且我们谈论了 Hagarism. 他对我说以下，他通过电子邮件以后证实： “那本书中央论文是，我现在认为，弄错。 Over the years, I have gradually come to think that the evidence we had to support the thesis was not sufficient or internally consistent enough.” On April 6, 2006, I interviewed Patricia Crone, as well, to see what she now thinks about the book. She was even more candid in repudiating the central thesis of the book. She agrees with the critics that the book was “a graduate essay.” The book was published in 1977 when the authors lived in England. “We were young, and we did not know anything. The book was just a hypothesis, not a conclusive finding,” said Crone. “I do not think that the book’s thesis is valid.”

Many Western scholars, Christians and Jews, have dismissed Hagarism as a “thin argument” rather than “credible research.” One historian who appears to admire the book is Daniel Pipes, who has taught at Chicago and Harvard universities. Pipes, an embittered Zionist known for his ugly utterings against Islam and Muslims, argues that while Western scholars like Crone and Cook “in the role of termites” are eating away at the magnificent Islamic edifice, Muslims are “acting as though the beams and joints were as strong as ever.” Even Pipes, however, describes the book as “wild.” Notwithstanding scholarly repudiations, Internet websites continue to rely on the book to malign Islam, assuming that the book?s thesis is derived from credible research.

Even online Wikipedia features the book, citing a large quotation from Daniel Pipes. The article concludes: “Although this line of research is discounted by Islamic traditionalists, Western scholars have generally applauded Crone and Cook’s advances in tracing the origins of Islam.” When I insisted that Wikipedia provide a source to support the above conclusion, the editor added “citation needed” to the conclusion. As of today, no citation to support the conclusion has been furnished.

Part of the confusion arises from the fact that Cook and Crone have made no manifest effort to repudiate their juvenile findings in the book. The authors admitted to me that they had not done it and cater no plans to do so. Repudiating scholarly work is not easy because sometimes errors are intertwined with valid findings. No scholar is obligated to rewrite books to correct errors. Scholarly decency, however, demands that the authors officially repudiate a scandalous thesis, one in which they no longer believe and one that maligns the faith of more than a billion people.

It appears however that the authors do not wish to discount a book that launched their careers and brought to them contacts and fortune. Patricia Crone teaches at the Institute for Advanced Studies, the academic home of Albert Einstein, an institute that proclaims itself as “one of the world?s leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry.” Michael Cook is a chaired professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, who in 2002 (a few months after 9/11 terrorist attacks) received a $1.5 million Distinguished Achievement Award from the Mellon Foundation ?for significant contribution to humanities research.?

One needs no brains to write against Islam in the Western world. After 9/11, anti-Islamic literature has become a big business that even acclaimed academics have generously exploited for self-promotion. In this milieu, repudiating even a false anti-Islamic book will be condemned as apostasy. We need not burn the book. Crone and Cook themselves must muster the courage and put out the brushfire they started three decades ago, albeit in youthful excitement.

Dr. Ali Khan is a professor of law at Washburn University School of Law in Topeka, Kansas. This excerpt is taken from his forthcoming law article, “The Externalist Scholarship on Islamic Law”, which will be published in Michigan State Law Review.