Lets see what the world has been saying about him. The Encyclopedia Britannica says, “.... A mass of detail in the early sources show that he was an honest and upright man who had gained the respect and loyalty of others who were like-wise honest and upright men."
While writing "The Genuine Islam", Sir George Bernard Shaw says, "If any religion had the chance of ruling over England, nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam. I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion, which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence, which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savoir of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness. I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.”
Michael Hart in his book' "The 100", says, "My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels."
Divan Chand Sharma in "The prophets of the last", says, "Muhammad was the soul of kindness, and his influence was felt and never forgotten by those around him."
French poet, historian and statesman, Alphonse Marie Louis de Prat de Lamartine, in his book Histoire de La Turquie, says, "Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images; the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?"
Gibbon, a historian of world repute says, "A pernicious tenet has been imputed to Mohammadans, the duty of extirpating all the religions by sword." This charge based on ignorance and bigotry, says the eminent historian, is refuted by Quran, by history of Musalman conquerors and by their public and legal toleration of other worships. The great success of Mohammad's life had been effected by sheer moral force, without a stroke of sword.
Prof. K. S. Ramakrishna Rao, Head of the Department of Philosophy, Karnataka says, "in pure self-defense, after repeated efforts of conciliation had utterly failed, circumstances dragged him into the battlefield. But the prophet of Islam changed the whole strategy of the battlefield. The total number of casualties in all the wars that took place during his lifetime when the whole Arabian Peninsula came under his banner, does not exceed a few hundreds in all. His wars did not exceed a few days. But even on the battlefield he taught the Arab barbarians to pray, to pray not individually, but in congregation to God the Almighty." He further says, "To the Arabs, who would fight for forty years on the slight provocation that a camel belonging to the guest of one tribe had strayed into the grazing land belonging to other tribe and both sides had fought till they lost 70,000 lives in all; threatening the extinction of both the tribes to such furious Arabs, the Prophet of Islam taught self-control and discipline to the extent of praying even on the battlefield. In an age of barbarism, the battlefield itself was humanized and strict instructions were issued not to cheat, not to break trust, not to mutilate, not to kill a child or woman or an old man, not to hew down date palm nor burn it, not to cut a fruit tree, not to molest any person engaged in worship. His own treatment with his bitterest enemies is the noblest example for his followers. At the conquest of Mecca, he stood at the zenith of his power. The city which had refused to listen to his mission, which had tortured him and his followers, which had driven him and his people into exile and which had unrelentingly persecuted and boycotted him even when he had taken refuge in a place more than 200 miles away, that city now lay at his feet. By the prevalent laws of war he could have justly avenged all the cruelties inflicted on him and his people. But what treatment did he accord to them? Mohammad's heart flowed with affection and he declared, "This day, there is no reproof against you and you are all free." "This day" he proclaimed, "I trample under my feet all distinctions between man and man, all hatred between man and man."
The prophet of Islam brought the reign of democracy in its best form. The Caliph Ali, the son in-law of the prophet, the Caliph Mansur, Abbas, the son of Caliph Mamun and many other caliphs and kings had to appear before the judge as ordinary men in Islamic courts. Every Muslim has been asked to enjoy the rights and powers of the "Caliph" of God, as compared to the notion of Caliphate being a system based on monarchy. The concepts of Western democracy make the people sovereign. The books that created the concept of democracy don't talk of this sovereignty. This concept of sovereignty looks like a way to mock people. As a matter of fact it has been proven that democracy does not show the sovereignty of its people at all. The Islamic system makes God the ultimate sovereign and all humans equal as his caliphs. And it is expected that they don't deviate from the teachings of God. Iqbal the great port of the east said that, "Islamic state is established on the principles of freedom, equality, and the absolute principles of stability. Therefore the principles of democratic rule is not only similar to the fundamental aspects of Islam, rather the executing powers are enhanced in the Muslim world by it."
The Reverend Bosworth Smith in "Mohammad and Mohammadinsm" says, "Muhammad was the Head of the state as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but, he was pope without the pope's claims, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a palace, without a fixed revenue. If ever any man had the right to say that he ruled by a right divine It was Mohammad, for he had all the power without instruments and without its support. He cared not for dressing of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life." Descartes says he was the perfect preacher among the rarest kind in the world.
Famous or the infamous, believers or non-believers, all have praised Muhammad (PBUH). Hitler in his Mein Kamp has expressed a similar view. He says "A great theorist is seldom a great leader. An Agitator is more likely to posses these qualities. He will always be a great leader. For leadership means ability to move masses of men. The talents to produce ideas has nothing in common with capacity for leadership." "But", he says, "The Union of theorists, organizer and leader in one man, is the rarest phenomenon on this earth; Therein consists greatness."
We all know how the black Negroes were treated by other races not long ago, let alone the state of a negro Slave, in the days of the prophet of Islam nearly 14 centuries ago. The office of calling Muslims to prayer was considered to be of high status in the early days of Islam. The Prophet deputized a negro to this task to show how all humans of any color were the same. Some proud Arabs painfully cried loud, "Oh, this black Negro Slave, woe be to him. Why he stands on the roof of holy Ka'ba to call for prayer." At that moment, the prophet announced to the world by saying that God has created families and tribes, so we may know one another, but the most honorable of you is the one who is most righteous among you.
Mahatma Gandhi in his book, "Young India" says, "I wanted to know the best of one who holds today undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind ... I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the prophet's biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life".
Mohammad (PBUH), was called the Muhammad the Prophet; Mohammad the General; Mohammad the King; Mohammad the Warrior; Mohammad the Businessman; Mohammad the Preacher; Mohammad the Philosopher; Mohammad the Statesman; Mohammad the Orator; Mohammad the reformer; Mohammad the Refuge of orphans; Mohammad the Protector of slaves; Mohammad the Emancipator of women; Mohammad the Law-giver; Mohammad the Judge; Mohammad the Saint, and you can read Edward Gibbon, Simon Ockley, Naidu, Hurgronje, Thomas Carlyle, Martin Lingus, and many more for more views about Muhammad (pbuh).
So who cares what a cartoonist says, under the umbrella of freedom of speech. I am going to give him the benefit of doubt and say the guy is ignorant. The cartoonist tried hard to gather people to make these caricatures for a children’s book, and many invitees refused to do so in the first place. Moreover, there was no important point being made in the cartoons that I can discern, merely a desire to offend. The whole idea was to cerate a new problem, not to fix the problems that we in the world are facing. Seemingly we all (Christians, Muslims, and non-religious alike) still have a long way to go in learning how to co-exist peacefully with cultures that are different from our own. There is an important difference between objective reporting and deliberate mocking. The first promotes reasoned debate, the second displays arrogance. Some are asking for incorporation of blasphemy laws in the constitution. I'm not the one to cry out for new laws, but sometimes I think we need one against criminal stupidity, for sure.
Many say that the cartoons about the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) were a hit below the belt. I think it really was. There are no referees, that's the problem. I think their is a difference between the freedom of thought and freedom of speech. I can not stand on the street and start making cartoons of every passerby who I don't like. I might not like people around me, but I don't say it or I do not have to make it known. My best friend is obese, I tell him to watch his weight, but I don't make cartoons of him and put them on notice boards. No matter how bad it sounds, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy required to live in this life. That's how I feel...
Muslims all around the world are not as knowledgeable as they used to be. The tables turned long time ago. Muslim scientists and scholars have contributed immensely to human knowledge especially in the period between 8th and 14th century CE. However, their contributions have been largely ignored, forgotten or have gone un-acknowledged. Some of the most talented Muslim scholars in history whose contributions have left lasting marks in the annals of science, astronomy, medicine, surgery, engineering and philosophy are Ibn e Sina, Ibn e Battuta, Ibn Al-Haitham (father of optics), Khalil Gibran, Al-Khwarzimi (father of algebra), the list is long... Those times were simple and there was no need for a lot of science and yet Muslim Botanist Ibn Baitar wrote on Botany after collecting plants from all parts of the world as stated by Myer in his Gesch. der Botanikaa-s and Al Byruni traveled for forty years to collect mineralogical specimens. The very spirit of observation and research was sparked by The Holy Quran, which was unknown to the Greek or the Romans. Muslim Astronomers made some observations extending even over twelve years. Aristotle wrote on Physics without performing a single experiment, wrote on natural history, carelessly stating without taking the trouble to ascertain the most verifiable fact that men have more teeth than animal. Galen, the greatest authority on classical anatomy informed that the lower jaw consists of two bones, a statement which was accepted unchallenged for centuries till Abdul Lateef took the trouble to examine a human skeleton.
Robert Priffault concludes in his well known book, "The making of humanity", "The debt of our science to the Arabs does not consist of startling discovers or revolutionary theories. Science owes a great more to Arabs culture; it owes is existence." The same writer says, "The Greeks systematized, generalized and theorized; but patient ways of investigation, the accumulation of positive knowledge, the minute methods of science, detailed and prolonged observation, experimental inquiry, were altogether alien to Greek temperament. What we call science arose in Europe as result of new methods of investigation, of the method of experiment, observation, measurement, of the development of Mathematics in form unknown to the Greeks. That spirit and these methods, concludes the same author, were introduced into the European world by Arabs."
Goethe, the greatest of German poets, speaking about the Holy Quran brought by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) declared that, "This book will go on exercising through all ages a most potent influence."
They are not ruling the world anymore. To give every one the benefit of doubt, no religion is believed to be ruling the world. Its about nations now, not religions. Its about economic wars, not religious wars anymore. I say, Iraq was invaded by USA and in the same way Kuwait was invaded by Iraq, prove my point. They both had their reasons, right or wrong.
It seems that the history is repeating itself. The Western image of the Prophet Muhammad remained highly negative till the dawn of eighteenth century. Scholars such as Pedro Pascual, Ricoldo de Monte Croce, and Ramon Llull, depicted Muhammad (PBUH) as an imposter and Islam as a Christian heresy, and in some of the books Muhammad was portrayed as the Antichrist. The fact that Muslim belief of Muhammad (PBUH) being a human like everyone else, and that he died like “an ordinary person” was contrasted with the supernatural end to Christ's earthly life. Image of Muhammad (PBUH) as founder of a religion that promotes violence found its way into many other works of European literature over the centuries, such as the chansons de geste, William Langland's Piers Plowman, and John Lydgate's The Fall of the Princes. Even Dante, who knew much about Islamic esoteric teachings, was forced to place the Prophet on the wrong side in his works. The first somewhat positive biography of Muhammad was Boulainvilliers's La Vie de Mahomet (“The Life of Muhammad”), published in London in 1730. The philosopher Voltaire had a fairly positive view of him as well. In 1742 Voltaire's tragedy La Fanatisme; ou, Mohamet le prophète (“Fanaticism; or, Muhammad the Prophet”) was performed in Paris, and Goethe translated it into German in 1799. At the same time, Thomas Carlyle broke new ground in "On Heroes", in which he provided a positive evaluation of the Prophet based on modern historical and analytical methods. Positive views about Muhammad (PBUH) came from many writers, philosophers and politicians including William Montgomery Watt in the shape of a book with two volumes. On the contrary, an Indian-Muslim, Ibn Warraq born in 1946, studied under Montgomery Watt in the University Of Edinburgh, started writing negatively about Islam and the Prophet. The petition to support the Jyllands-Posten cartoons, "Manifesto :Together facing the new totalitarianism", was signed by Salman Rushdie, Ibn Warraq and 10 other personalities in response to violent and deadly protests in the Islamic world. The petition says that "After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism", Salman Rushdie and his colleagues have declared, "the world now faces a new global threat: Islamism." Hamid Danbshi says, "How so, and by what authority? One looks in vain in the list of the statement's twelve signatories allied with Rushdie for someone with the remotest sense of demonstrable knowledge about this goblin of their perturbed imagination that they keep calling "Islam".
But going back to the cartoonist, I think he might be of some use. These cartoons and critical works of many others might force the Muslims to wake up. Muslims need to ask ourselves. Did they do anything wrong or help to create a wrong image of their prophet. Did the leave the path that was set for them. People who go and kill innocent human beings are using the name of the Prophet and Quran to justify their acts, using them as a motivation, in search of cheap popularity, false egos and ignorance. The prophet they believe in or the book they read has not allowed them to implement their own judgments on other people. Only God has kept that authority. Helping to create a bad image of the religion and the religious figures, muslims of today are equally responsible as the cartoonist. I think if these cartoons and newly emerging concepts about Islam do not wake them up, nothing will.