This is the Safari online edition of the printed book.

Praise for Bernard Lewis

"For newcomers to the subject[el]Bernard Lewis is the man."

TIME Magazine

“The doyen of Middle Eastern studies."

The New York Times

“No one writes about Muslim history with greater authority, or intelligence, or literary charm.”

British historian Hugh Trevor-Roper

“Bernard Lewis has no living rival in his field.”

Al Ahram, Cairo (the most influential Arab world newspaper)

"When it comes to Islamic studies, Bernard Lewis is the father of us all. With brilliance, integrity, and extraordinary mastery of languages and sources, he has led the way for[el]investigators seeking to understand the Muslim world."

National Review

"Bernard Lewis combines profound depth of scholarship with encyclopedic knowledge of the Middle East and, above all, readability."

Daily Telegraph (London)

"Lewis speaks with authority in prose marked by lucidity, elegance, wit and force."

Newsday (New York)

"Lewis' style is lucid, his approach, objective."

Philadelphia Inquirer

"Lewis writes with unsurpassed erudition and grace."

Washington Times

An objective, easy-to-read introduction to Islam by Bernard Lewis, one of the West’s leading experts on Islam

For many people, Islam remains a mystery. Here Bernard Lewis and Buntzie Ellis Churchill examine Islam: what its adherents believe and how their religion has shaped them, their rich and diverse cultures, and their politics over more than 14 centuries. Considered one of the West’s leading experts on Islam, Lewis, with Churchill, has written an illuminating introduction for those who want to understand the faith and the global challenges it confronts and presents. Whatever your political, personal, or religious views, this book will help you understand Islam’s reality.

Lewis and Churchill answer questions such as...

• How does Islam differ from Judaism and Christianity?

• What are the pillars of the Islamic faith?

• What does Islam really say about peace and jihad?

• How does the faith regard non-Muslims?

• What are the differences between Sunni and Shi’a?

• What does Islam teach about the position of women in society?

• What does Islam say about free enterprise and profit?

• What caused the rise of radical Islam?

• What are the problems facing Muslims in the U.S. and Europe and what are the challenges posed by those minorities?

Amazon.com® Reader Reviews (Ranked by Helpfulness)

Average Amazon.com® Rating:  Based on 92 Ratings

Worthy of Praise and Criticism - 2009-06-10
Reviewer Rating:
Bernard Lewis's latest collaborative book effort with Buntzie Ellis Churchill, entitled "Islam: The Religion And The People", (hereinafter referred to simply as "book") has resulted in a book worthy of both praise and criticism.

Before I begin any criticism, let me affirm that I am an admirer of Prof. Lewis' work, his scholarship, and his courage in speaking out against radical Islam. My criticism herein is meant to be constructive only and is not meant to dissuade anyone from reading his body of work. I have read many of his books and my understanding of Islam and the Middle East was greatly advanced by doing so. While I have some criticism of the book, I am in complete agreement with many of his conclusions, including his view that the clash of civilizations we are now experiencing is every bit as much of an important World conflict as the previous fight against Nazism and Bolshevism. I also agree with the book's warnings that due to Islam's advance, the West is in serious danger, the outcome of the conflict between the West and radical Islam is in no way assured, and that if we are to survive the threat from radical Islam "it is important to understand precisely and accurately, the source, nature, and purpose of the attack - that is to say, the very identification of the enemy we are to confront." I am further in absolute accord with the book's assessment that Muslim migration to the West has resulted in a potential fifth column beyond terrorists' "wildest dreams" and that "their work is facilitated and even helped by the widespread mood of guilt and self-denigration in the West, often expressed in the form of multiculturalism and political correctness."

For making the foregoing points alone, Bernard Lewis and Ms. Churchill deserve tremendous praise and perhaps even a medal because it takes immense courage to state such views. But the courageous points made in the book are somewhat diminished by other deficiencies that are worthy of discussion.

My greatest disappointment was when I noticed that Prof. Lewis' latest book did not clearly explain the centrality of Muhammad to the Islamic faith nor were the type of unsavory details of Muhammad's life that help anyone trying to understand modern Islamic terrorism clearly explained. I see this deficiency in an inordinate number of books about Islam, but it is more troubling to see such an error of ommission by such a great historian. I was left with the impression that the book either assumed the reader knew of Muhammad's importance to Islam or believed, in error, that the book covered the topic well enough. But this was a book that was clearly designed to be an Islam 101 beginning reader for non-Muslims and, as such, its discussion of Muhammad was wholly inadequate.

I strongly believe that any book that seeks to explain Islam needs to carefully emphasize Muhammad's role in founding the religion and the nature of the religion as an allegedly revealed religion. The failure to do so is a significant flaw in any book that purports to explain Islam no matter how well other important issues are covered.

I was also disappointed to see that Prof. Lewis claimed that any belief that Muslims worshiped Muhammad as Christians worship Jesus is "entirely false." At best, such a statement needs clarification. At worst, the statement is not completely accurate because some people that claim to be Christians deny that Jesus was anything other than a man and their level of worship of Jesus is easily surpassed by much of the Islamic world's worship of Muhammad. Readers of the book would be better served had the following points been clearly made as I will attempt to further clarify and explain below.

As Islam's Founder, Muhammad's Story is Crucial to Understanding Islam

Usually, but not always, a religion's origins can be traced to the shared beliefs and ideas of one individual. Christianity, Islam and Buddhism all have this feature in common - they all originated from one founder, but not the same founder. However, there is something more to the two largest religions in the World, Christianity and Islam. They are known as revealed religions. With respect to Islam, this means that the religion arose from the thoughts and ideas of Islam's founder, Muhammad, because he claimed that his thoughts and ideas, at least those set forth in the Qur'an, were revealed by Allah. (Fn. 1)

Muslims have no dispositive proof that Allah spoke to Muhammad or that he was a prophet. (Fn. 2) Islam is, therefore, driven by faith in Muhammad. Faith distinguishes a person's religion from his or her acquired knowledge based upon observation, experience, and education. If one could prove that any particular religion was correct by direct and/or circumstantial evidence, then it would no longer be a religion. It would simply be an awareness of God and his commands much in the same way that one is aware of the government that holds authority over us and those aspects of the law that impact our lives.

Revealed religions like Christianity and Islam depend upon the faith of the religions' adherents that the founder of the religion was who he said he was and that he revealed what God intended for believers to understand about God and how God intended for people to conduct their lives and gain salvation. Muhammad was the sole founder of Islam. Unlike Christianity, Islam's holy Book, the Qur'an, stems solely from its founder. The Bible, by way of comparison, has many contributing authors over many hundreds of years. Because Muhammad was not only Islam's founder, but was also the soul source of the religion's holy book and Islamic doctrine, it is crucial to point out with the maximum possible degree of emphasis that Islam is all about Muhammad and to understand Islam one must have a full understanding of all that is known about Muhammad.

Why Islam is All About Muhammad

The faith aspect of Islam is what differentiates a Muslim from a person that has simply studied Islam and is familiar with Islam's confession of belief. A Muslim is a person who publicly states at least one time with conviction based upon his or her faith that: There is no god but Allah and Muhammad was his Prophet. (Fn. 3) This profession of faith or confession of belief is known to Muslims as the Shahada - an Arabic word meaning to testify. A person that says the Shahada with conviction is a Muslim because he or she is believed, in essence, to be testifying that there is only one God named Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet. Muslim means one who surrenders or submits in Arabic. Muslims are taught to say the Shahada five specific times per day during ritualistic prayers while facing Mecca. Given that, amongst other things, Muslims, at least practicing Muslims, say that Muhammad is the prophet of Allah multiple times every day during prayers, that belief is indelibly and deeply imprinted into their belief system. The overwhelming reinforcement that occurs in Islamic culture that Muhammad is Allah's prophet and messenger begins at birth and continues throughout life. As one narrator accurately and eloquently phrased it, the Shahada is "whispered into the ear of every newborn Muslim child and lingers on the lips of the dying. They [words of the Shahada] have been the subject of Islamic poets and calligraphers down through the ages." (Fn. 4)

Given the centrality of and absolute importance of Muhammad to Islam, it would be more accurate amongst non-Muslims to refer to Muslims as Muhammadans and Islam as Muhammadanism given that the religion is predicated entirely upon what Muhammad alleged Allah revealed to him, Muhammad's life and Muhammad's instructions. It is not, therefore, surprising that countless people from all walks of life have referred to Islam as Muhammadanism for centuries.

It cannot be emphasized enough that the beginning of wisdom with respect to an understanding of Islam is the realization that Muhammad did not just bring monotheism to the Arabian Peninsula. Seventh century Arabs were probably eventually headed toward monotheism anyway. Of far more significance is the fact that Muhammad also brought the belief that Muhammad was the Prophet, Apostle, and Messenger of Allah, that Muhammad had to be obeyed as commanded by Allah, and that Muhammad's life was the perfect example for living. It is this aspect of Islam that so negatively impacts the modern world.

The aspect of Islamic belief that Allah commanded that Muhammad must be obeyed and, further, that his life is a perfect example for Muslims to follow has overwhelming ramifications when trying to gain an understanding of Islam. It is not, therefore, hyperbole to say that Islam is all about Muhammad. The very name of the largest sect of Muslims, Sunni Muslims, derives from the word Sunna, which means "path"the path being the following of Muhammad's example.

Muhammad is Seemingly Worshiped by Millions of Muslims

Muhammad is so central to Islam that one of the objective measurements of how well one understands Islam is the degree to which it is understood that Muhammad has been all but deified in Islamic culture. While Muslims deny that Muhammad was anything more than a man whose life was a perfect example to emulate - the Quran states that Allah instructed Muhammad to tell others: "I am only a mortal like you" (Fn. 5) - in reality the degree of reverence and devotion afforded him suggests that somewhere along the line he was raised to near divine status by much of the Islamic world. This reality explains why Muslims can become so violent over perceived insults to Muhammad.

While many people are familiar with the controversy that arose after Salmon Rushdie published the Satanic Verses in the United States and after cartoons that depicted Muhammad were published in 2005 by a Danish newspaper called Jyllands-Posten, less well known incidents occur periodically that highlight the near deification of Muhammad. For example, in 2002, riots erupted killing 200 people after a Nigerian newspaper suggested that if Muhammad were alive at the time that he might have chosen his bride from among beauty contestants. While these violent eruptions are typically portrayed by the media as unrepresentative of Islam, the reality is that such homicidal rage resulting from criticism of Muhammad is deeply rooted in Islamic doctrine. For example, when Muhammad and his warriors marched on Mecca and the Meccans surrendered, most were spared but Muslim apostates and anyone that was known to have criticized Muhammad or made satirical statements about him were murdered as clearly set forth in the Sirat Rasul Allah as translated by A. Guillaume. (See also Fn. 6) What is also truly ironic about the violence is that the statement that Muhammad would have chosen a bride from among the beauty contests is probably accurate. Muhammad had an eye for lovely women. He had numerous wives and relationships with his slaves. His recorded history undisputably reveals that he took captured women as wives or concubines. A man that went so far as to take his adopted son's wife as his own and to proclaim that God supported the conduct would have had no qualms whatsoever about taking one or more of the beauty contestants as wives or concubines.

One of the definitions of worship is "ardent devotion or adoration." It is undeniable that there is significant ardent devotion or adoration of Muhammad throughout the Islamic world. What other conclusion can we draw other than there is some level of worship when violence erupts as a result of fair, seemingly innocuous comment about a beauty pageant. While official Christian doctrine would at first blush seem to go much further in causing worship of Jesus than does Islamic doctrine cause worship of Muhammad, in practice many Muslims seem far more protective of Muhammad and certainly act in anger at the slightest insult to him whereas Christians seem to tolerate the most severe, irreverent criticism, depictions and portrayals of Jesus without violence. Accordingly, while Prof. Lewis makes an arguable point when he states that any belief that Muslims worshiped Muhammad as Christians worship Jesus is "entirely false," his analysis of Islam and the degree of understanding he imparts to his readers would be far better served by a more clear explanation of his point because there is undeniably significant worship of Muhammad throughout the Islamic world. However, readers of Prof Lewis' book might, in error, well conclude otherwise. I suspect that there is a certain teacher still smarting from the so-called teddy bear incident that could perhaps enlighten Prof. Lewis as to Muslims' actual sentiments about Muhammad. I am, of course, referring to the 2007 incident wherein Sudanese authorities threatened a British teacher with 40 lashes and a Muslim mob threatened to kill her after she allowed her young students to name a teddy bear Muhammad in a class project. If such an incident is not evidence of some degree of worship, I cannot help but wonder what would constitute such evidence.

An Understanding of Muhammad's Violent Acts Helps Explain Islamic Terrorism

The book also could have and should have explained far more of the details of Muhammad's life that modern terrorists emulate. New students of Islam would clearly have a better understanding of Islam if they understood that Muhammad had critics and rivals alike killed, that he ordered captives beheaded and tortured, that he waged war for no reason other than those he attacked were non-Muslims, and that Islam alone among the World's religions commands the faithful to wage war on non-believers for the sole reason that they do not accept that Muhammad was God's prophet. (Fn. 7) While Prof. Lewis does give some information on these topics, he seems to refrain from full disclosure and a completely candid discussion. It may be that as an academic he fears the backlash that might ensue from such a candid discussion.

The Book also does not Carefully Distinguish between Original Islam and Evolved Versions

I was also disappointed in the book in that it seems as if Prof. Lewis uses some evolved version of Islam as a baseline when he makes such statements as "[t]oday we face a third such totalitarian perversion -- this time, not of a country, nor of an ideology, but of a religion, Islam." Prof. Lewis seems to justify his position based on friendlier versions of Islam that appeared over the ages and what he views as perversions of the Islam practiced by moderate Muslims. However, I think his readers would be better served to be taught what Islam was as preached and practiced by Muhammad and then clearly delineating it from softer versions of Islam that developed at various times and places over the centuries. While I agree that terrorists seem to take some liberties with Islamic doctrine, there is a great deal of support within actual Islamic doctrine for their views and conduct and they are hardly "hijacking" Islam or "perverting "Islam" simply because other Muslims have at certain times and places developed a more peaceful version of Islam than the one actually established by Muhammad himself. If anything, it seems that peaceful Muslims are the ones that hijacked or perverted the religion and we would be far better off if they simply converted to Christianity rather than pretend that Islam is something that it is not and in the process causing such confusion about the true, original nature of Islam. While Muslim apologists can and do craft many disingenuous arguments that seek to place the harsher aspects of Islamic doctrine in a softer light, the history of Muhammad and his first coverts proves that the harsher aspects of Islamic doctrine were meant to be taken literally.

Suicide Bombings Do Not Take as Much Liberty With Islamic Doctrine as Asserted in the Book

One alleged perversion of Islam that Prof. Lewis discusses is the modern phenomenon of the suicide bomber. Islam certainly denounces suicide and suicide bombers are a new development in Islam given that, obviously, there were no bombs in Muhammad's time, but the concept is a mere degree of change from the prior belief that a man that willingly goes to certain death fighting non-Muslims "in the name of Allah" was assured his place in paradise to the belief that a suicide bomber who does the same thing, but whose death arises from his own attack on the enemy as opposed to the enemy's direct hand, is also assured of paradise because the goal is not suicide, but to kill the enemy for Allah. It follows that while the suicide bomber may well be a new development in Islam as Prof. Lewis states, it does not seem to be nearly as much of a clear-cut "perversion of Islam" as Prof. Lewis appears to believe. Sadly, while the terrorists may be taking some liberties with their faith, they nonetheless seem to be far closer to the Islam Muhammad preached and practiced than cultural Muslims that are perfectly comfortable living in peace with non-Muslims without, at a minimum, reducing them to dhimmi status.

Terrorist leaders can and do make very convincing arguments that Islamic doctrine supports their conduct. Their arguments are, at least to those that accept the Qur'an as the literal word of God and accept Muhammad as a perfect example to emulate, far more convincing than the disingenuous arguments of those that have tried to falsely portray Islam as a religion of peace. Religions seem to generate a certain spirit in their most ardent followers that varies from religion to religion. The modern spirit of Islam seems to drive the most deeply devout toward hatred and violence toward non-Muslims and quite often other Muslims. The hatred, at least toward non-Muslims, is very well supported by Islamic doctrine. One thing that cannot be denied is that Islamic terrorists are acting well within the spirit generated by Islam from nearly its inception as a religion that promoted hatred and violence toward non-Muslims. In that regard, Islamic terrorists are being just as faithful to their religion as Mother Teresa was faithful to the original spirit of Christianity by seeking to help the poor and downtrodden.

Finally on this topic, I am not so sure that there is not some actual support for suicide/homicide bombings in Islamic doctrine. In the Sirat Rasul Allah, regarding the attack on the Khaybar Jews, a story is told of a Muslim warrior who died when his "sword turned upon him as he was fighting and gave him such a grievous wound that he died of it." Exactly what happened is not made clear, but it may be that his sword was deflected back and caused the Muslim warrior to mortally injure himself. In any event, the Muslims were in doubt as to whether the warrior died a martyr under such circumstances because he died, just like a suicide bomber does, of his own weapon. However, Muhammad declared that "certainly he is a martyr." Again, exactly what is meant by his sword turning on him is not clear, but this passage certainly lends some support to the notion that one can die as a result of one's own weapon while killing non-Muslims and nevertheless die a martyr with Muhammad's blessing. As such, the modern suicide/bomber is not nearly the absolutely clear-cut "perversion" of Islam as alleged in the book. Muhammad exhibited a great deal of pragmatism when it came to killing non-Muslims and an overall understanding of Muhammad and how he lived and what he said arguably does support any means whatsoever that is employed to advance the spread of Islam and the destruction of any enemy in the way of "war in Allah's cause" also known as Jihad. At a minimum, the legitimacy of the suicide/homicide bomber as an Islamic martyr is an arguable point.

The Book Does Not Explain the Danger of Moderate Islam

The book goes too far in asserting that it is a perversion of Islam threatening Western civilization. Given such a view, it comes as no surprise that Prof. Lewis gives no indication in his book that we should be concerned about moderate Muslims and if he does it is so subtly stated that i missed the point. However, if we are to be honest and true to ourselves and our inalienable right to survival, we must concede that Islam is a threat in all of its guises.

Moderate Muslims have no legitimate doctrinal support for their peaceful version of Islam. As a result, moderate Muslims are not nearly as vibrant and motivated a group as fundamentalist Muslims are and offer nominal assistance and support, if any, to non-Muslims terrorized by fundamentalists. A small number of fundamentalists seem capable, therefore, of controlling vastly greater numbers of the less devout and radical.

Worse yet, moderate Muslims seem to have fallen into the role of a Trojan horse. While they may be passive and not overtly dangerous much in the same way as the wooden Trojan horse was not dangerous in and of itself, their presence protects and hides fundamentalist Muslims. Moderate Muslims inadvertently act as a shield for the radicals. It is also the existence of moderate Muslims that confuse Westerners about the nature of Islam. In short, moderate Muslims make it hard to identify, root out, and destroy Islamic terrorists.

Further, because individual Muslims sometimes display great individual qualities, we continue to allow Muslims to immigrate to the West despite the fact that Muslim immigration results in a certain percentage of fundamentalist Muslims infiltrating the West and inevitable Islamic inroads into Western culture with all of the evils that follow.

From where do the terrorists recruit their members? It is, of course, from the ranks of moderate Muslims. Even the children of moderate Muslims sometimes become fundamentalist Muslims in Western countries. While their parents, foe example, may have cut their teeth on moderate Islam while growing up in those parts of the World where some government exerts control over what is taught in the Mosque, their children receive the full Wahhabis blast in Western nations where the Saudis and others are free to control the nature of what is taught by their financing of Mosques and the training of the Imams that teach in them.

It may well be that it is the so-called moderate Muslims that turn out to be Allah's best weapon against Western culture. The migration of Muslims to Western nations is unprecedented in history. The long-term effect will be no different than the Muslim migrations that followed the great Arab Conquests of the seventh and eighth centuries. The only difference is that this time no military victory was needed to clear the path for the migration.

Conclusion

Why it is that Western nations with deeply established and cherished values that are completely at odds with Islamic/Muslim values allow so many Muslims to settle within their borders so as to threaten the very nature of Western culture is beyond comprehension. Perhaps, at least in part, it stems from the failure of so many books about Islam and alleged experts on Islam from telling the complete truth about the nature of the religion as nothing more than pure Muhammadanism with all that necessarily follows from that conclusion. Sadly, Bernard Lewis' latest book has fallen into the same error albeit to a far lesser degree than most other books about Islam.

A terrible mistake - 2009-05-12
Reviewer Rating:
ISLAM: THE RELIGION AND THE PEOPLE

There comes a time when even the most relentless warrior must say "farewell to arms". And for Bernard Lewis, this time has come - unfortunately.

As the most outstanding and trustworthy Orientalist of the Western world, Bernard Lewis taught many generations of non-Muslims what Islam is all about. And his duels with the notorious Edward Said (the fiery "Palestinian" Islamist that preferred living very comfortable in the U.S., lecturing at Columbia U., rather than in the West Bank or Gaza, next to his compatriots) were a real balm to one's heart and mind.

This book, written - for unexplained and unexplainable reason - in "partnership" with one Buntzie Ellis Churchill, was a bad idea. A very bad idea, in fact. It adds nothing, absolutely nothing, to his enviable curriculum and should not have been written. No new ideas or facts, current or historical, are being made available to his anxious readers, giving one and all the distinct impression that it was published mainly to help Ms. Buntzie Churchill's professional standing - whatever it might be.

A scorching criticism ought to be directed to Wharton School Publishing for an amazingly unprofessional job, with poor page layout, grey "windows" in the middle of pages promoting, as their title says, "Islamic Humor" (an oxymoron, if ever there was one), etc., etc. It all looks like a job hastily put together, for whatever reasons.

My personal recommendation: For those interested in understanding what happens in the world today courtesy of Islam and Islamists - don't fail to buy and read any and all books written by Bernard Lewis. ALL, EXCEPT ONE: "Islam: the Religion and the People".

Thoroughly disappointing, certainly not recommended. - 2009-06-05
Reviewer Rating:
If you are interested in learning about Muslim customs, dialect, and dress, this book is for you. If you're looking for an in-depth analysis of the history and current state of Islam as a religion, keep looking. Some people may find it interesting to learn the names of the various Muslim garments (none of which I can now remember), but I suspect most people that look into this book will be searching for something with a little more investigation into the background and meaning of Islam and the current thinking of Muslim people. And there is very little of that to be found here.

Even the chapters dedicated to what I thought would be the more informative aspects of the book are rather shallow. Analyses of the status of Muslim women and of the reasons for the Islamic world's regression in technology and economics are less than inspiring. In fact, nearly everything in this book, except for various Arabic words and their definitions, seems commonplace and well-known. Really nothing ground-breaking or understanding-inducing to be found.

This book also fails to provide any sort of depth in its analysis of Islamic history, the Koran, or the prophet Mohammad. Surprising given the title of the book, but fitting considering the rest of the content. The book does include a few Koranic quotes that help explain Muslim tendencies toward war and conquest and provides the very ambiguous conclusion that Islam is really neither a "religion of peace", nor a backward and dangerous religion of the sword.

Ridiculously un-funny excerpts meant to demonstrate "Islamic Humor" appear throughout the book. Most are impossible to see how they could possibly be considered funny in any way at all, while a very few show some small glimmer of cleverness, but still fail at approaching anything near a joke. The following quotes one of the more disturbing examples of Islamic Humor found in this book (p.217):


A certain man became a Shi'ite and went around saying that whoever was not a Shi'ite was a bastard. His son said to him: "But I am not a Shi'ite."
To this the man replied: "Yes indeed. I bedded your mother before I bought her."


The book ends with a extremely disappointing chapter entitled "Radical Islam" that takes up all of about 5 pages and is mostly a discourse on the correct descriptor to use when talking about Islamic extremists, and with a statement by the authors to the effect of -Most Muslims are not radical, and most radicals aren't terrorists. Almost no analyses of why radical Islam has become so prominent, nor what radical sympathizers want or expect. You do get a nice photo of Osama, but absolutely nothing about his past or present influences or inspirations. Or about the reluctance of Muslim leaders to condemn terrorist acts.

So, if you want to learn about Arabic writing styles, architecture, and clothing, you may want to check this one out from your public library. But if you are looking for something to really help you understand the philosophies, thoughts, and motivations of the Islamic people that have so suddenly come into all of our daily thoughts, look elsewhere.

An introduction to the topic - 2009-11-08
Reviewer Rating:
The book made an enormous effort of covering all aspect of Islam in a sober way. If you don't know the topic I think it's a good start before consuming the scary parts in other books.

Simple, but disjointed and shallow, introduction - 2009-06-10
Reviewer Rating:
While worth reading, I found that this light introduction didn't have the depth to be satisfy my curiousity about Islam. It's easy to read and contains a good set of facts, but overall I found the presentation disjointed. As a first book, I prefered Karen Armstrong's Muhammad. For a more in-depth book, I prefer Reza's No God But God -- although that one is written in a more academic rather than lay-person tone.

Browse Similar Topics

Top Level Categories:
Business

Sub-Categories:
Business > International Business