5 comments about The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam.

1. I was touched by this woman's struggle to be free. It was not that she was throwing off all restraint. She was throwing off laws that even Abraham did not require of Sarah.



2. This book is awesome and very revealing about the worldview that Muslims have. I highly recommend it for people interested in learning more about Muslims and the way they think and act.



3. I have not read this book yet so I can only comment on the physical appearance which is excellent



4. Having read Ali's first book, I wasn't really impressed with "The Caged Virgin." I was expecting it to be a well researched documentary about women in Islam, but it turned out to be a compilation of interviews, speeches and commentary by Ali. There were many interesting points, but I found it to be choppy and difficult to keep my attention focused on the book. If you're interested in a more in-depth look at women in Islam with a first-person account, I suggest reading "Infidel" (also by Ayaan Hirsi Ali) instead.



5. This book is non sense. These lady is not Arabic and not Muslim. So, do not let her mislead you. We, Americans, are used to learn from specialists and read only peer reviewed articles by professionals. In the 21st century, you can not believe anything you read without evidence. Generally, I think nobody from any where in the world will be proud and we be bragging with his friends if his daughter lost her virginity !!! We do not need a book for that. If she is proud of her lost virginity, this is her own problem !!!

5 comments about Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror.

1. This book is an education for everyone about the situation in the Middle East. It's a sobering picture of that area. Kudos for the author for her bravery in rejecting the Muslim party line. Her solutions for the problems there are - peace, not war - love not hate. God bless her.



2. This book is so important in our understanding of how the radical terrorists operate.Not all Muslims are terrorists and most peace loving Muslims, Buddists, Jews and Christians can't get thier heads around this type of political madness.



3. Nonie Darwish tells it like it is...her story is amazing and I applaud her courage and strength for telling it.
   
   As an American living in Iran for three and a half years leading up to the Iranian Revolution of 1978, I witnessed firsthand some of the frightening and unstable mindsets of those obsessed with jihad. I totally related to her story, especially the part when she returned to Egypt for a visit after 20 years. Because then she was seeing her country through the eyes of an American.



4. This is a book that every thinking American should read! Its insight into the Muslin world and the Muslims' way of thinking is imperative to our understanding of why we are having so much trouble trying to impose our standards on them. They are taught hatred of Americans from birth -- how can we hope to change that? If you want to improve your insight into the present conflict in Iraq and understand the problems there, you MUST read this book!



5. In this book, Nonie Darwish traces her life from a childhood spent as the daughter of a Muslim shahid in Egypt to her adult life as a conservative Christian in the United States. This amazing transformation took place because of her insight into the hatred preached by Muslims whose goal in life was to eradicate Israel and the United States. Instead she sought freedom and security in America, a country she has come to love and admire. She shows the Arab culture from the inside and she describes the inhumane treatment of people, especially women, who are under sharia law.
   She explains how Muslim customs dehumanize people and cause a breakdown in the family and in society. She feels that her purpose in life is to warn Americans about the dangers of Islam and the true intentions of a culture that is, even now, working its way into America via immigration and influencing our citizens, especially on college campuses. This is an eye-opening book and should be required reading for Americans.

5 comments about The Great Arab Conquests: How the Spread of Islam Changed the World We Live In.

1. Hugh Kennedy has done a great service in explaining what otherwise seems to be the mysterious explosion of Islam in the wake of Muhammad. In a hundred years or so, Islam came out of the deserts of Arabia to, at least, dominate the world from Sind to the Pyrenees challenged only by the Byzantines, the wild Turks beyond the Central Asian borders and occasionally discontent Berbers in North Africa. So often our historical understanding of events comes down to clichés. Arab conquests I used to think of as a result of some vague Jihadi spirit that overcame some ill defined mess at the end of the Roman empire, not knowing that North Africa and the Near East were in fact vibrant societies. Byzantium, Romanized North Africa, and Persia were still very much together and Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian which, besides the bigotry of Christendom, tolerated each other. The Arabs burst into this, having the advantage of the exhaustion of both the Byzantine and Sassanian empire after terrible warfare, an economic decline following outbreaks of the plague and some mysterious military advantage which the historical record is inadequate to illuminate. Despite occasional setbacks, the Arabs and people they recruited on their advance were able to win most major battles. We don't really know why armies which fifty years earlier would have decimated the Arabs lost time and time again.
   
   What is really useful in Kennedy's history is the picture of Muslim tolerance and the lightness of its rule in the early years. The Copts in Egypt seemed to prefer the rule of Islam which let their religion alone to that of Constantinople that demanded doctrinal conformity. Though there were depredations in the course of conquest, as long as conquered people paid their taxes (which they sometimes found oppressive), the conquerors let them pray as they wished and did not interfere with their economic activities. We know that within a few hundred years these previous Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian societies became overwhelmingly Muslim. People chose to convert to avoid taxes, further their careers in a progressively more Arab bureaucracy, and maybe, because they found Islam more attractive. If this was indeed the case than our contemporary understanding of Islam needs much revising or maybe the history of how Islam changed in the intervening years needs to be more accessible.
   
   I am glad I read Kennedy's book. The only complaint I have is the detail, much of which doesn't mount up to a coherent narrative: too many battles, generals, and post facto panegyrics to characters. But as the author says, that is what we have for historical record. It is not very satisfying from a modern perspective of what history should look. So trying to wade through it all to get a narrative picture which never quite emerges is a bit of a drag. You can't blame the author for it. If he had archive like those of Germany and the Allies during WWII, the causes would be more evident. What is clear is that the Arabs did conquer and maybe some non Arab religious adherents were better for it.
   Charlie Fisher author of Dismantling Discontent: Buddha's Way Through Darwin's World



2. This sweeping, engrossing narrative of Muslim conquests begins after the death of Muhammad in 632. The prophet's death and the subsequent Islam-inspired military conquests had reverberations that echo today. Author and professor Hugh Kennedy has taught this topic for 30 years. His thoughtful presentation molds diverse renditions of these complicated events from various historical Arab and non-Arab sources (some fragmentary) into a driving story about the people and events that shaped Islam. With a critical eye and an engaging style, he includes details about the cultures, politics, battles, beliefs, personal lives, heroics and motives that drove the men whose armies ranged over some of the world's most remote areas about 1,400 years ago. Reconstructing and deciphering these events is no easy task for any historian, yet Kennedy's book has aspects of a great novel. getAbstract highly recommends it to anyone interested in Islamic history and beliefs, which continue to shape the Middle East.



3. Kennedy traces the Arab conquests from the death of the Prophet Mohammed in 632 to their conclusion at the door steps of China in the East and Europe in the west just over hundred years later.
   
   Kennedy ascribes the amazing success of these conquests to several attributes:
   
   --Muslim solidarity behind their self-confident religion and its promises of success in victory and eternal glory in honorable defeat.
   
   --Arabic physical endurance as they marched from the desert reaches of the Saudi Arabian peninsula north, east, and west to far borders broader than the Roman empire they helped to splinter.
   
   --Invaded societies weakened by religious infighting (Orthodox vs. "heretical" Christians), other enemies (the ongoing battles between the Byzantine and Persian empires weakened both societies in advance of the Muslim incursion), and possibly declining populations decimated by the vermin-borne plagues which would later ravish Europe.
   
   --Defeated peoples who were often willing to accept, without revolt or insurrection, the light hand of Islamic rule which at times was no worse than the local polity, and at times even preferable.
   
   The surviving contemporary sources Kennedy has available to draw on are frustratingly sparse, mostly unverifiable, and often written for specific audiences and purposes at cross-purposes with those of a modern historian. In particular, the Muslim accounts were usually written for the purposes of documenting the participants in conquests, marches, and battles to justify claims of religious, tribal, and financial honor. Most of the Muslim writers were working decades and centuries after the events, writing moralistic tales to gloss and glorify the heroes of the faith and the field of battle.
   
   Still, Kennedy does a good job with the necessarily broad narrative, drawing interesting lessons even from the most abstract and obviously allegorical writing, while stressing the irresolvable uncertainty about chronology, characters, and geographic locations.
   
   One striking observation Kennedy makes from the few narratives written by contemporary or near-contemporary Christian writers was their almost universal lack of religious rancor against the Muslim invaders. These writers were more likely to see the Muslim invaders as God's chosen vessels of punishment of Christian heresies than as anti-Christian heretics themselves.
   
   Ultimately, Kennedy concludes, the Arabic advance was stopped more by the geographical limits of the Atlantic Ocean at the western edge of North Africa and the impassable mountains of the Sino-Pakistan border in the East. In fact, Kennedy says the borders of the Arabic empire can be traced with surprising accuracy by following the 1,000-meter contour lines on a relief map; the warriors who haled from and fought so well in hot, dry lowlands, were apparently not physically acclimated or politically predisposed to fight, live, and rule in higher and cooler climates. The few rebuffs that the Arab armies suffered occurred in the highlands of Spain in the West and Pakistan in the East.
   
   Another interesting question that Kennedy raises is the essential nature of the conquests. Were the participants acting primarily as Arabs, or as Muslims? Were they seen by their protagonists primarily as Arabs, or as Muslims? While the conquests began as an explicitly religious jihad, much of the morale and motivation of soldiers was driven by tribal loyalty which preceded religious affiliation with the Prophet and his potent ideals. Did the answer to those questions matter to the success of the conquests? In some of the eastern reaches of the conquests it did, says Kennedy, where the attackers faced the most foreign environments, cultures, and religions (Buddhism and Zoroastrianism).



4. Hugh Kennedys' Great Arab Conquests, covers the expansion of Islam from Muhammad's death in 632 until 750. This is a timeperiod unfamilar to most readers. Hence, many place names and historical personages, are unfamilar (Can you place Transoxania on a map?). Ocassionally, but not often enough, the author clarifies by saying, "in what is modern day . . ." He included several maps, but neglected to include modern-day boundaries.
   
   The minute details of the where and the what are clearly important to the author. Such details are necessary not just the sake accuarcy, but to establish the author as unbiased in his conclusions. While he doesn't say explicitly, he seems to be aware that as a "British professor" his conclusions will come under particuarly close scrunity by Muslims in general and Islamic scholars in particular.
   
   Still whatever one's faith, the swift expansion of Muslim rule, is impressive and therefore important to understand. The historial signficance alone makes "Great Arab Conquests" an important read. Additionaly, given author's passion for accuaracy and objectivity, the reader has confidence that this is THE book to read on the subject.



5. I was searching for a good, synthetic but serious book about the muslim conquest for a long time. For me as a french, it was a more difficult task to find it in my native language since many books about the subject in french are too old or too summarized.
   The great arab conquest is a solid, well documented book and the author gave us an almost complete view, altough not exhaustive, about the conquest.
   It was important for me to find an author who could work with arabic sources, even if the account from muslims historians must be studied carefully. Hugh Kennedy has aknowledged, with humillity, that he cannot give a full light about all the events and due to a lack of sources many of them will remained uncertain.
   The book give us also a good background about the situation in arabia, the neighbouring empires and the doctrinal divisions especially in the byzantines provinces. It is necessary introduction for understanding the conquests.
   The chapters are divided by geographical areas of conquest which is not very imaginative but it has the advantage to be simple and Hugh Kennedy is hopefully a good narrator so the book is not difficult to assimilate.
   We can also notice that the author refers to the "arab conquests" and not "muslim conquests" as usual (in my case in france)and i found his view on the subject very interesting. Arabs were the bulk of the army with a strong arab spirit, the tribal ties "'açabiyya" - including internal divisions between the tribes, the idea of being a superior cast, remained vivid even with their fellow muslims from other ethnies.
   Although Hugh Kennedy doesn't differentiate himself with other scholars about the reasons of the conquest's success, persians and byzantines weakened by their previous conflict, hostility of some christians populations towards the byzantine church, this book is a must have for everyone who want to learn about this period of history and a good beginning for those who want to read further with other scholars such as at-Tabari.
   ps: Sorry if my english is a little "boring"

5 comments about Understanding Arabs: A Guide for Modern Times.

1. Having been to the Middle East twice, I found this book to be a very good general overview of how to try to "understand Arabs." Nydell keeps things pretty basic and hits all of the important points. Also, this book is very up to date with some data coming within the last year. The commentary towards the end paints a rosy picture of Arabic view of America/the West that I am not sure I completely agree with, but in contrast to some other books, at least Nydell has some facts to back up her statements. I highly recommend this book for anyone travelling to the Middle East for the first time or anyone looking to gain some cultural insight into the Arab mindset.



2. I was quite disappointed with some of the material. Not only did the material seem slightly biased toward a more kindly view, it had a negative opinion of "The Arab Mind", by Raphael Patai. The Arabs have not changed substantially since the seventh century. The tomes written by Jesuits and others, such as Andre Servier (La Psychologie du Musulman) are still quite useful and still important. I would keep the book in my Library, but I would certainly wear out others first.



3. I'm an American Christian woman, and I've been married to an Arab Muslim man for the last four years. This book caused some light bulbs to go off for me. It clarified past events that were puzzling to me.
   
   It's a well written book that clearly hopes to offset the bad press that Arabs have been getting these past few years. However, the author is fair in her assessments of those areas in which the West and the Arab world need to make changes to improve relations and, perhaps, prevent another 9/11. It's an even-tempered discussion.
   
   It includes wonderful summaries of Arab countries, including economic, political, and religious information about each country. A great resource!



4. You will find this to be one of the very best overviews of the main values and ideals that westerners find unusual or uncomfortable. This book gives tremendous help to move beyond "this is wrong" towards "this is different."



5. This book IS THE DEFINITIVE resource in educating the Western Mindset on how best to PRACTICALLY wrap oneself effectively toward relating with the Middle Eastern Mindset. A quick read, table of contents easily listing topics of interest, and practical tips on how to deal with prospective day-to-day interactions with an Arabic person in their home country.

5 comments about Worlds at War: The 2,500-Year Struggle Between East and West.

1. This study of the combative relationship between the West (secular, individualistic, progressive) and the East (intolerant and hidebound) might seem to be yet another entry into the triumphalist school of history: The West Beat The Rest Because Its The Best. However, those who actually read the book will recognize that Anthony Pagden has produced a remarkable work which traces and reassesses anew a centuries long struggle.
   
   By the East Pagden means what most now call the Middle East and Central Asia. Beginning with the struggle between the Greek city-states and the Persian Empire, Pagden then covers the empires of Alexander and of Rome, the rise of Christianity and Islam, and the resultant struggles between the two monotheistic religions. Some of Pagden's most ascerbic comments come at the expense of monotheism, whose adherents' tendencies to see the world in black and white he considers to be the root of most of our troubles. Fortunately he resists the temptation to sneer at the followers of those religions, reserving his scorn for those popes, caliphs, and other religious "leaders" who abused their power and wasted the lives of their communicants. Inevitably Pagden must finish his work with an examination of the troubles between the West and the Islamic Middle East in the twentieth century, and he provides an excellent history of that ongoing dispute, ending with some penetrating analyses of the mistakes both East and West have made over the years.
   
   Pagden writes well, with a good eye for an illuminating anecdote. I wish a few more maps had been included to help locate some of the more obscure locales he mentions, but overall this is a fine work which I really enjoyed.



2. This is an excellent work of history. Correction: it is not so much a history - though it is historical through and through - as it is a particular interpretation of one very important aspect of world history: namely, the seemingly endless and seemingly inexplicable antagonism between West (the cultural region where individual and group rights, liberty and liberties, and specific "modern"/modernity-inflected social formations arose) and the East (the cultural region, roughly equivalent to the Arab world, where rights and democracy, let alone the individual, have been largely ignored). As Pagden tells this story, he touches on the important and nodal episodes, but he also adds his view of some of the incidental episodes. He provides an excellent historical overview, supplemented by a clever and diligent scholar's look at key moments, of both of these regions, and of their interrelationships. Obviously a lot has to be left out given the sheer number of centuries in question, but Pagden is hugely learned and so packs in all kinds of salient details. (His academic expertise is on the rise of modern Europe, and its "collision" with other parts of the globe.)
   
   The book is long but thankfully he writes very clearly. He moves fluidly from Aeschylus and Alexander the Great, through the legacy of the "citizen" empire (Rome) and the rise of Muhammad, to the medieval Popes, through to Quesnay, Voltaire and Montesquieu and the Enlightenment, and finally on to the complex recent past and the present (Qutb, etc). He doesn't pull any punches: yes, the "orient" actually has been largely despotic, and yes, the West has often been -- for all of its successes and both its authentic good intentions as well as its exploitative acquisitiveness -- hypocritical and inept even when it has been well-meaning. Re: the latter, he discusses the question of liberal interventions, which he treats almost in a Burkean fashion: these are overly optimistic social engineering efforts, which often naively assume that the conditions for a genuinely valuable and important Western form of government (democracy) can be transplanted to places where the conditions that might nourish it are sadly foreign. He is also tough on Islam's apologists, past and present, rightly noting their own hypocrisy and almost perennial cruelty and anti-democratic impulses. He rightly chastises the leftists who celebrated the rise of Khomeini, pointing out that none had bothered to read his writings before celebrating his accession. And no less a figure than Edward Said -- author of a well regarded but simplistic (if not downright mendacious) tome on a part of the history of West and East -- comes in for some curt but devastating criticism. All in all, this is a grand, sweeping read. It's very much worth acquiring, especially if one is interested in the present and how we got here, but it's also a book one can give to a high school student or university student, e.g., one's nephew and niece, just so they can sample a work that does a fine job of making sense of a vastly complicated relationship. If they get through it, as one would hope, they'll be as shocked and disappointed as I am, and as Pagden is, to learn that in Turkey, Winnie-the-Pooh is no longer televised because the "Piglet" character is deemed offensive to Muslims. Don't laugh. Try to get a piggy-bank for your grandchild in a UK bank these days.
   
   (I must add: reading the review of this book by a top 1000 reviewer - above - I came away thinking that he hasn't even read it. Pagden does in fact credit the Islamic world for many advances, and early on in his preface, he makes it very clear that when he speaks of "East" and "West", he's not talking about "unstable" "relative" geographical categories but cultural, social and political dispositions. Is that the sign of a "book maven": one says some banal and inaccurate things about a book?)



3. Excellent and easy to read historical review. Helps us understand the predicament we're in because many of our leaders are history-oblivious. History (and this book)shows that we continue to pursue policies that are counter productive because we ignore the lessons of history and repeat the same mistakes.



4. This book goes back to the beginning of European civilisation and its main feature: individualism of free people, compared with the oriental collectivism and slavery.
   Very readable.



5. I was appaled by the low quality of research that went into the book. From distortions to sheer factual errors and inventions, Pagden seems to think that he can freely translate the Greek "barbarian" as Oriental/Asian, and argue that both Greeks and Romans were somehow prejudiced against a decadent East. Nothing could be further from the truth. For both the Romans and the Greeks the lure of Persia, Egypt, Syria, was spellbinding, powerful, and largely positive. There may have been a Cultural Prejudice, but it never amounted to what Pagden labels as "World at War".
   
   Pagden chose to select only quotes which reflect badly on both East and West. He genuinely seems to believe that the Greeks, for example, considered themselves a "Western" people. This is factually wrong. Nor does he correctly understand the Roman foundation legend of Aeneas. Wrongly attributing Latin pressure on the Etruscans, to assimilationist calls upon the Trojans! In touching upon Roman perception of Anatolian Greeks, he wrongfully claims that Anatolia was inhabited by Persians - because of a weak link between the Achamenids and Mithridates IV! This is an unpardonable error, in a book of such nature!
   
   This book is poison. For years academics have been trying to rid themselves of Said's "Orientalism" slur against Western Academia, and here we have a self-proclaimed "Westerner" rehashing the very charge all over again- but trying to present it in a positive light!
   
   Do yourself a favor, and skip this book all together. A wilder bag of lies is hard to find.

5 comments about Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet.

1. Karen Armstrong writes an incredibly accurate portrayal of the life of the Prophet accept without 75% of his life. Muhammad had a life where the entire last half was dripping with blood. Armstrong does a great job of referencing the great, peaceful philosophies of Muhammad while grazing over the slaughter of the Jews of Banu Qurayze for not converting. Islam has the belief of abrogation, which is that it is alright for the Qur'an to contradict itself because the later revelation overwrites the earlier one. The call for Jihad at the end of Muhammad's life is then the law that is to be followed. Muhammad was not a man of peace by any means. Extremely intelligent, and a phenominal leader, but far from peaceful. For a dry but immensely more accurate picture of Muhammad's life, read The Life of Muhammad. This is the oldest account of the life of the Prophet that is still in existance and many historians claim as the most accurate.



2. I would have preferred more direct sources- more quotes, more historical moments- less interjecting of personal ideologies, especially her recovering Catholic philosophical interludes. She also made blunders that led me to question her reliability. For example, she inferred that the Qu'ran is written in chronological order! (The Qu'ran is ordered from longest to shortest chapters).
   
   Her book does not strike me as being historically accurate, but is an attempt to show Muhammad in a positive light- every attack Muhammad made on the Quraysh, Jews, and non-believers were pro-active defensive measures... reminiscent of George Bush's "pre-emptive strikes".
   
   I enjoyed a few passages when Armstrong's personal interludes were kept down to a minimum and the history of a fascinating man and time and place unfolded. But for the most part I felt like I had to read between the lines. I know when I'm hearing only one side of a story.
   
   Definitely not a historical book. Falls into the category of polemics.
   
   If you haven't read an other book on the subject try a different author first.



3. I have read several reviews about Karen Armstrong book many have liked it and others have called her naive . I guess it is how we view her writting skill. First point is that she is not a muslim to have any kind of biasing.I have found her impartial.she has presented query from western perspective as well as islamic perspective. She has presented her work in such a way that it brings out prejudism and threaten their own preassumtions regarding Mohammed and Islam. I have found her work very analytic not lacking any sophistication.
   This book can bring out prejudism and preconcieved ideas that people have developed over the ages living in western world viewing islam through that lense.
   It is how we view a glass half full or half empty. We are looking at same book and presenting different views as we see it.



4. It's been awhile since I read this book, but I must say that it is clear and concise, and informative. I think everyone should read this book, maybe George Bush should be sent a copy (does he read?)
   
   It's imperative to have understanding about the Story of Mohammed, after all, we know he existed, we have no proof that Christ did.
   
   It is simply amazing what Mohammed managed to do to create stability where there was the possibility for factions by the score to develop. Bad enough we must deal with two factions at this time, (and Karen explains where this originated) But we have Mohammed to thank for the fact there are 'only' two.
   It could be worse!
   
   I was glad to see, too, that Karen put the connection together in this book about the Ismael the first son of Abraham, (with the maid servant of Sarah) and Mohammed connection . I was sure there was a connection. It's in this book!
   
   Insight, and education, makes such a huge difference in our perspectives. Karen is a prolific writer who began this writing early in life for reasons explained in The Spiral Staircase. Another great book that helps us to understand the part the brain plays in spirituality. Go on to read, The Brain That Changes Itself. ( not an Armstrong book)



5. This is a good book that attempts to introduce Muhammad in the most positive light possible: Armstrong believes that Westerners do not understand enough about Islam and its founder, and so produces this argument. It is long on reason and seeking to find common ground - essentially in monotheism - between the East and West. No doubt this is an important task, but her approach in my reading is to bend over backward to excuse Muhammad of virtually any negative legacy. As such, this slants the book too much towards good intentions.
   
   In socio-historical terms, Armstrong believes that Muhammad emerged in a culture in crisis, offering a new religious solution that first and foremost worked politically. The Arabs, she says, had developed a tribal culture, whereby relative peace was maintained by the threat of blood feud - if a tribal member was injured or murdered, revenge was exacted on whomever belonged to the offending tribe, beyond the individual responsibility of the person who carried out the act itself. This worked while tribes were separated in the desert, but began to break down with increasing urbanization in 7C: close proximity bred violence, which easily spiraled out of control into endless mob violence. Muhammad's solution was to create a version of monotheism, that united the Arabs to a single purpose, transcending the polytheistic patron gods of the various tribes in their battles. This is a very interesting existential perspective.
   
   Armstrong also describes the unique details of Islam, as Muhammad created it: the Kuran offered a poetic vision that mesmerized many Arabs in an untranslatable sense. The new religion also offered a new kind of submission to Allah, which carried with it an ethical code that she convincingly argues is close to the essence of Islam. I enjoyed her vision of the religion and gained empathy from it for the prayers I have observed personally.
   
   Muhammad's vision was of course not easy to impose on a primitive culture. This is where Muhammad's political genius comes in, a perspective I found fascinating and valuable: he knew when to compromise, but also understood how society was reorganizing itself and so could set political precedents that often caused grave doubts in his followers before revealing themselves as phenomenal strategic successes later on.
   
   Along the way, Armstrong does pose many of the difficult questions, but somehow finds a way to dismiss them by putting them into historical context, comparing them to existing practices in Christendom and elsewhere. This works well, for example, when she argues that Muhammad in fact worked to liberate women (in a relative way). However, it often fails to satisfy, at least in my own reading. He ordered massacres in Jihad (even of Jews in Medina), the text of the Kuran froze many medieval attitudes into an orthodoxy that is proving rigid today, etc. These are serious problems that cannot be argued away as facilely as Armstrong attempts. In my opinion, she did not wrestle enough with a lot of these questions.
   
   The book ends on an interesting note, arguing that the current crisis in Islam began in the 17C, over 1000 years after Muhammad created his politico-religious system. At that time, as science and then industry developed in Europe, Islamic states/empires began to falter, which raised the question of whether God annointed their religion as indisputably superior anymore. This is very thought-provoking and articulated a view I have wondered about for a long time.
   
   Recommended. Armstrong's heart is in the right place, even if it makes her argument a bit too politically correct for my taste. Nonetheless, a worthy introduction to Islam it is indeed, but only as a starting point.

5 comments about Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources.

1. Most books of this nature are more often than not loosely translated from Arabic-written texts ensuing in bad grammar, and a dire story line. But as this is written in English it thankfully avoids all of the above. What I love about this biography is that Ling's explains in great detail not only the life and mission of Prophet Muhammad, but also the fundamentals of Islam. It begins with the significance of the Kabaa and ends with the death of the Prophet whilst illuminating everything in between. This book is also broken down into several chapters allowing for an easy read.
   
   Even though this is a great source of Islamic knowledge, it may be a difficult read for some non-Muslim readers. As advice, I would recommend this as a follow up to a simpler biography [of which I don't know any that Amazon or a ordinary bookstore would sell -- sorry].



2. The book was easy reading. Very straight forward. I liked it. Informative and interesting.



3. This is a book to keep for life, to lend and EDUCATE your friends and family.
   The author has simply laid down the life of Prophet Muhammad (saws) for both Muslims and non Muslims to appreciate his greatness .
   It is in great detail, and it is amazing to see how much Muslims know about the life of their Prophet, as compared to the LITTLE Christians know about Jesus.



4. Excellent work by Martin Lings ( who has now reverted to Islam). Alham dullia, may Allah guide us all on to the rightious path.



5. Its hard to put down the book,once you have started it.The effect is almost like a movie,you are restless till you have seen it all.Particularly,Martin Lings did an excellent job of making the reader familier with the Arab culture 1400 years ago, a must have, while studying the life of the Prophet(pbuh).
   With Muslims from diverse cultural backgrouns, this is an excellent source.

5 comments about The Middle East.

1. I first read Lewis's book about five years ago and found it slow going. It made no significant impression on my mind. In the intervening years I've read fifty or more books concerning the history and politics of the Middle East. Fortified with new knowledge I decided to give the renowned Lewis another reading.
   
   My second reading of the colossus of Middle Eastern history was just as unrewarding as the first. Professor Lewis, in this book, comes across as boring, meandering and forgettable. The Amazon reviewer who states "Lewis chronologically traces the political, economical, social, and cultural development of the Middle East" never read this book. There is nothing chronological about it.
   
   Lewis warns us on the first page of the Preface that this book will not concentrate on "political and military events of the Middle East" but on "social, economic, and above all cultural change." But he doesn't warn us that this information will be presented in a confusing hodge-podge of lifeless prose. In an apparent attempt to be "objective" the great historian treats every subject in the same monotone. He is so cautious that every statement is qualified, nuanced, digressed upon and then qualified again until the reader's mind wanders.
   
   The prodigious Professor Lewis was 80 years old when this book came out in 1995. He'd already written twenty major works of Middle Eastern History, starting in 1940. His magnum opus was the 1978 four volume "Cambridge History of Islam." I doubt that this present book was newly written. It reads as though many parts were taken from his previous work, and conflated into a "new book."
   
   There is nothing wrong with writers recycling their previous published material, but Lewis makes no mention of doing so. Yet this is the only explanation that makes sense to me for the unevenness of the book and the confusing way it is presented. At times it reads as though Lewis shuffled parts of his previous work together randomly, like a deck of cards. (Or, maybe it was parts of his memory he was shuffling.)
   
   The last section of the book, Part V of V, "The Challenge of Modernity" is the most interesting and relevant part of the book. But even here Lewis often tends to veer off course and get bogged down in detail and digression.
   
   "The Middle East: A Brief History of The Last 2,000 Years" has polarized Amazon's reviewers more than any book I know. It is either acclaimed or discredited; there's not much middle ground. I give the work three stars because it does contain a mass of historical information. I take two stars off due to Lewis's leaden prose, confusing presentation and lack of illuminating interpretation.



2. Like many of you, I had heard good things about this book, but it turned out to be a disappointing slog. How this or that caliph raised taxes and other equally scintillating topics get hundreds of pages of stuffy prose. The Crusades, the fall of Constantinople, Timur and anything else exciting are lucky to get a few paragraphs. The author's feelings about Islam are also a bit over the top: he describes various aspects of this religion as "pristine" at least four times that I counted. The history of Islam in the middle east (especially the tedious bureaucratic details) is the real topic of this book.



3. I cannot agree with the statements of some that this is "dull" or "booring". I am not aware that a serious reader expects non-fiction, history books to be exciting! I think that says more about the reader than the author and this book.
   
   Professor Lewis has done and excellent job of providing an introduction to the history of this area and setting out a foundational explanation of the genesis of problems that exist today. I found the organization difficult to stay with at times but I am more accustomed to a linear historical format.
   
   One does not have to be a serious student of history to appreciate what this book offers. I would recommend this book highly, especially for an understanding on a very basic level, of why the U.S. has no business invading the area.



4. Even for someone who enjoys "real" and substantial history books, as opposed to more trendy light reading, this was too boring to finish. The level of detail compares to a Norman Davies level but without the same kind of purpose or cohesion.



5. This book serves as an epitome for the wrong way to teach history. Instead of recognizing history as an integrated narrative on human civilization, Dr. Lewis' book presents Middle Eastern history as a database of names, dates and facts. Granted, you will find plenty of information in here on the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphates, the Arab conquests, the Mamluks, the Seljuks and the like. However, you will not find emphasis on the important individuals or the widely held ideas that shaped and drove Middle Eastern history.
   
   For example, al-Ghazali, who is one of the most important intellectuals in Middle Eastern history, is hardly mentioned at all in this book. Before al-Ghazali, there was a golden age in the Middle East, where Muslim scholars in Baghdad were translating an extensive number of works from the ancient Greeks and Muslims were making unprecedented advances in mathematics, medicine, astronomy and philosophy. However, it was al-Ghazali who in his work "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" essentially single-handedly persuaded the Muslim world that reason and faith are incompatible and therefore reason (i.e., Aristotelian thought) must be rejected in favor of faith. In terms of ideas, the wide acceptance of al-Ghazali's work is the most significant turning point in Middle Eastern history and yet al-Ghazali himself is only mentioned on about 4 out of 400 pages of this book.
   
   Whenever I inform friends and colleagues that I enjoy reading about Middle Eastern history, Bernard Lewis' books are almost invariably recommended to me. If his other books are like this one then I do not recommend the works of Bernard Lewis for recreational reading. Nevertheless, I am still giving this book three stars, since it does contain a wealth of (unfortunately unintegrated) facts.

5 comments about 50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God.

1. Guy Harrison has written a good book for the non-technically oriented person interested in the God hypothesis. Harrison does a wonderful job of articulating why it makes little sense to believe in the face of 50 of the real reasons why the average person in the pew believes. There are many gems of wisdom in this book as Harrison offers up intelligent answers that everyone can understand against the claims of believers.
   
   John W. Loftus, author of "Why I Became an Atheist."



2. Harrison is an anthropologist. He studies Man's cultures, including the thousands of religions that have been invented. Yes, he is of the mind that Man made it all up without even knowing it, but he does not discriminate, insult, or otherwise abuse believers. He likes them and frequently attends religious services with them. Harrison has made it a habit to ask believers why they believe in their god or gods. In this book he has compiled essays built around the fifty most common answers to that question.
   
   His essays are not formally philosophical and are not about splitting theological hairs. Instead, each essay is conversational common sense with statistics about religion thrown in. He does not capitalize god or gods, since he rarely talks about any specific deity, among the thousands that have existed. Several themes recur: He emphasizes that every believer is an atheist about every god other than their own preferred god. Which god a person believes in is almost always an accident of birth. Atheists don't choose to be atheists - they just end up not believing. They are the fourth most plentiful group, after Christians, Muslims, and Hindus - and that only counts the ones out of the closet. The fifth most plentiful group is animism. Various religions make irreconcilable claims that can't all be right, despite the zeal of their believers. This most likely suggests that none of them are true and that humans are good at inventing gods. The countries highest in atheism are the most peaceful and the countries highest in religiosity are the most violent. The same picture shows up in blue versus red states in the US. Although religions are capable of good things, on balance, they are bad for society.
   
   Harrison gives religion some direct hits, usually with a bit of humor:
   
   "...atheism is not a conscious act of turning away from all gods. It is simply the final destination for those who think...you will be pleased to discover that the sky does not fall down on your head...if you still want to pray, you can (the success rate of your prayers is unlikely to change)."
   
   "...it can be a wonderful life without gods...wise choices, hard work, being born somewhere other than an impoverished hellhole, good health, and a little luck can add up to a fine existence for just about anyone."
   
   "...couldn't natural disasters such as tsunamis, floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, droughts, and tornados be unintelligent and indifferent events that can strike down anyone anywhere, regardless of which gods are prayed to? ...it matches the reality we see in our world."
   
   A fine addition to the recent surge of non-believer books. This one is a kinder, gentler version, and fun to read - with this disclaimer from the author: "No gods were harmed in the writing of this book."
   
   DB
   
   
   
   



3. This is an outstanding book. Each chapter is conversational, clear, and thoughtful. Rather than being heated and dogmatic, it is open, calm, and reasonable. I often think that anti-religion books just say the same arguments over and over, making the same old critiques, etc. -- and yet I found a lot of new material and novel insights in this book, and there were many ideas, concepts, arguments, and points that I had never thought of before. So I was pleasantly surprised by how many times I was impressed by a new insight or well-worded rebuttal to religious claims. I strongly recommend this accessible, engaging, fresh book.



4. Guy P. Harrison's, 50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God, is an honest, funny and brilliantly simple look at belief. His tone is not that of an esoteric philosopher, but of a normal guy who gives simple reasons for why people's reasons for believing in a god or gods are not justifiable or provable.
   
   Harrison's book is written after discussing the topic of belief with many believers over his career as a journalist. Harrison is great at showing the counterarguments and then refuting them without being condescending or insulting to believers. He also shares several personal anecdotes that are meaningful and genuine to the overall context and tone of the book.
   
   The simple theme of the book ends up being that people have very little validity for why they believe what they believe. And although they are not by any means bad or stupid people for this, the question remains: how long will these people continue to deny the evidence against the existence of god or gods?
   
   Whether you are a devout Christian or a devout heathen, this book is a great read.



5. It's rather difficult to find a book on atheism versus religion that doesn't come across as snide or condescending. Guy P. Harrison does an amazing job of both taking the side of atheists and not belittling religious people in the slightest.
   
   The author's tone is very empathetic. He presents 50 chapters with 50 reasons people have given him for believing in a god. He doesn't discriminate any one religion in his responses, which is a first I've seen. Even more intriguing is that he is willing to point out the good in religion. At the same time, he won't pull his punches--if there's an ugly side, he'll lay it out for you.
   
   As a curious believer myself, I didn't find anything offensive in this book. It's a good, interesting, intelligent read and will certainly give any believer something to think about when they finish each chapter.
   
   Extremely well done, and highly recommended to everyone--even atheists, who may also walk away with a new understanding of believers.

5 comments about Prisoner of Tehran: A Memoir.

1. This book was brought to my attention by a friend who had heard Ms. Nemat speak on the radio. He was moved by her experience in Iran as it so closely mirrored his own. Having listened to his stories of surviving the Revolution in Iran, I decided to read this book as well.
   
   Ms. Nemat is a teen-aged girl living in Tehran when the Shah is deposed and the Islamic Revolution begins in full force. She is a Christian who has lived a normal life in Iran, up until turmoil brought on by the revolution skews what she knows. When she attempts to appeal that academic subjects be taught in school, she finds herself jailed in Evin, the notorious prison in Tehran. What follows is her story, as she remembers, of her 2 years in this prison, her release, and survival.
   
   Ms. Nemat admits upfront this book is her story, remembered many years later. And, as many of us know, memories are what they are - but they are ours. This book reads very much like a conversation with the author, rather than straight factual account of events. This easy-going style makes the book easy to read and causes the reader to get caught up in the author's life tale.
   
   I know that several reviewers here and other places over the internet have stated that Ms. Nemat's story is not "real." I simply can't speak to that. I was born and raised in the U.S., and Iran is a different country and a different culture from what I am used to. But I will state there were events in the book that I found difficult to believe had happened. If Ms. Nemat states she remembers these events, then I suppose they are true. But they do seem rather fantasical.
   
   I would recommend this book. It is engaging, interesting, and allows the reader to view a different world than normally seen. However, I personally would like to read other stories from women with similar experiences to get a comparison. (Those that I have seen so far have been in languages other than English.) Yet, for an interesting read, I don't think too many will be disappointed with this book for one woman's view.



2. This writer ranks right up there with the author of "The Kite Runner" and "A Thousand Splendid Suns". She has not made the best seller list yet but as word spreads about what an excellent book this is then she surely will. Marina reveals her life as a prisoner in Tehran and the horors of a place like that. During her time in prison she was forced to marry one of the prison gaurds. He was later killed by his fellow political allies...shot down in cold blood in front of Marina...She was returned to prison but her father-in-law worked tirelessly to get her released. After some time she was released and returned to her family. She later marries her childhood sweetheart and after several years they escape and manage to get into Canada where she now lives....
   
   If you read it it will change your life just as The Kite Runner and A Thousand Splendid Suns have changed the lives of many people and their concept of the inhabitants of these two countries. So little is know and there is so much to learn...
   
   Marina NeMat is a CHRISTIAN and she was persecuted for being one. When people critize her work others need to look closely at why they would do so....They just might be Islamic....



3. IF YOU LIKE REAL LIFE STORIES YOU WILL LOVE THIS BOOK. YOU GET TO KNOW HOW LIFE IS IN IRAN AND HOW FANATIC RELIGION IS USED AS AN EXCUSE FOR THE ATROCITIES THAT ARE PRACTICED AGAINST VERY YOUNG AND INNOCENT PEOPLE,THE ABSOLUTE LACK OF FREEDOM ... THINGS THAT WE CAN'T IMAGINE ARE STILL HAPPENING IN IRAN , IN THE 21 ST CENTURY !!!!



4. I have read the reviews that are good, bad as well as the very heated discussions about this book and I have to say that it is good that this book generated such intense reactions in mind of the readers as it did for me. Regardless of the accuracy of the author's account as I don't have the first hand experiences, I assume that most of the author's accounts of the general political and cultural environment in Iran are fairly accurate. My reaction is again, the disbelief over the oppression and violence towards women in the name of religion and traditions, and the conspicuous lack of uproar in the international community in the name of political correctness or "cultural sensitivity". I don't mean to minimize the importance of other causes that received attention, such as Chinese government against Tibet, but when it comes to women, the world seems to be rather silent. Books such as this, and other memoirs such as Infidel, Bookseller in Kabul, Wild Swans,and memoirs by FLDS survivors are important means to raise awareness, therefore need to be written and to be read. Having said that, I gave only two stars because the writing is very poor and flat and some recollections of her childhood experiences seem too romanticized and blantantly inconsistent with her developemental stages, which raised questions in me about the believability of her account, and eventually became distracting to me.



5. As a person of the same age as of this woman, who has lived in Iran until 1994, I have to say I find this book a bad piece of fiction, written for the Western audience and ready-to-be-sold to Hollywood to make a crappy movie.
   The truth is, in those years our life as a nation was miserable. Evin prison was full of political prisoners, and there was no freedom of speech. But things were not the way Nemat describes it. Her memoir is ridiculously fabricated with lies about everything you can imagine about Iran. People of age 15 were executed in Iran in those years, but for reasons more politically important than leading a strike in high school! Is she crazy? If the Iranian regime wanted to arrest every high-school student for their argument with their math teacher they could not rule the country. And that story about being saved by her interrogator: nothing can be more far from reality than that. This is more like an emotional Hollywood movie than the reality I have lived in.
   
   I cannot believe people here actually believe this nonsense. This woman is either a charlatan, or a psycho.