God, Muhammad and the Unbelievers: A Qur'anic Study.

• Author: Lawson, Todd
• Position: Book Review

God, Muhammad and the Unbelievers: A Qur'anic Study. By DAVID MARSHALL. Richmond, Surrey: CURZON PRESS, 1999. Pp. xviii + 222. [pounds sterling]40.00.

The primary purpose of this book is to delineate a development in the manner in which Muhammad and his followers related to those deemed outside their community. The book is divided into four sections: 1) an introductory methodological reflection; 2) a brief history and analysis of the study of the punishment narratives in the Qur[contains]an; 3) focus on the punishment narratives revealed during the Meccan period; 4) the punishment narratives revealed during the Medinan period. The text is supplemented with an appendix reflecting various issues arising from a comparison between the Qur[contains]an and Sira (pp. 187--89); two postscripts: "Mecca and Medina: The Two Paradigms in Contemporary Islamic Thought," and "Some Comparativist Biblical-Qur[contains]anic Reflections Arising from This Study." The apparatus, in addition to the fifty-six footnotes found throughout the text, consists of a bibliography (with some puzzling omissions, e.g., MacAuliffe's Qur[contains]anic Christians [Cambridge, 19911]) and three indices, the latter covering "Qur[contains]anic Passages," "Biblical Passages," and "General Topics."

The general tenor of the discourse is signaled on the first page of the preface (p. vii) where the author defines the ummah as being purely Muslim: "An important issue within [a study of da[subset]wah] would be the different ways in which Muslims conceive of the relationship between the Muslim ummah (community) and those outside the ummah (non-Muslims)." This is striking because it has never really been established that the ummah is meant to be composed of Muslims only. For evidence, quite apart from the social history of the dar al-islam, we need only consult the so-called "Constitution of Medina," said by the sources to have been written by the Prophet himself. It is noteworthy, therefore, that on p. 17 the author explicitly removes the Constitution of Medina from the list of topics he chooses to discuss in his book. This decision is made because of a dedication to following the strict methodological constraint of sticking to the Qur[contains]an and is justified further, on p. 129, where it is explained th at just as the (presumably irenic) Constitution of Medina will not be mentioned because of its extra-Qur[contains]anic status neither will the (presumably aggressively exclusivist)...