The Portrait of Muḥammad in Ibn Sa‛d’s Ṭabaqāt

Introduction
The search for the historical Muḥammad has occupied modern historians since the
nineteenth century (Peters, and references therein). More recently, scholars have turned to
analyzing biographies of Muḥammad from a literary perspective (Rubin, 1995; Milby, 2008).
One finding is that the portrayal of Muḥammad at a given time reflects the perceptions of the
people who circulated the stories at that time, and of their contemporaries.
Our focus is on perceptions of Muḥammad in a ninth century biographical dictionary
compiled in Baghdad by Muḥammad ibn Sa‛d (d. 230 AH). This work entitled Kitāb al-Ṭabaqāt
al-Kabīr (hereafter denoted as KTK) consists of biographies of personalities involved in the
transmission of Ḥadīth (i.e. Muḥammad‘s legacy) up to the time of the compiler‘s death. The
first printed edition of the KTK appeared in Leiden (Ibn Sa‛d, 1905). The first two volumes of
this edition were dedicated to the Sīra of Muḥammad. They are the main source of biographical
information about Muḥammad. However, the rest of the book contains many snippets of
information that are valuable for understanding the overall perception of Muḥammad during the
compiler‘s life time.
The earliest extant biographical dictionary in the Islamic tradition, the KTK, contains
information that does not exist in later sources. Muḥammad‘s Sīra in the KTK, however, is not
the earliest extant book in its genre. Our earliest extant written full sīra dates from the
second/eighth century, i.e. Ibn Isḥāq‘s Sirat Rasūl Allāh (d. 151 AH). Several other writers,
contemporaneous or posterior to Ibn Isḥāq, compiled biographies of Muḥammad in the genre of
Maghāzī (Motzki, 2000); namely Mūsā ibn ‛Uqba (d. 141 AH), Abū Ma‛shar al-Sindī (d. 170
AH), and Muḥammad ibn ‛Umar al-Wāqidī (207 AH). Only al-Wāqidī‘s Maghāzī has survived.
What makes Ibn Sa‛d‘s Sīra more relevant for the issue of Muḥammad‘s portrayal in the second
and third centuries is that it is based on all of the aforementioned sources, in addition to a large
compilation of ḥadīths and shorter narratives from multiple other sources.
The sīra genre displays more effort, albeit not entirely successful, than al-Maghāzī to
present a flowing narrative of Muḥammad‘s life. However, there is a degree of integration at
which the sīra genre has been frozen. This resulted in chronologically organized but independent
scenes; for example Muḥammad‘s immigration to Medina, or the accusation of adultery ‛Ā‘isha,
Muḥammad‘s youngest wife. Ibn Sa‛d‘s Sīra is not a continuation of this integration effort. It is
rather a reversal to the collection of atomic narratives, because it is divided into titles; each title
deals with either a major event in Muhammad‘s life or with a topic about his life that is of
interest to transmitters and scholars of Ḥadīth, such as Muḥammad‘s treaties with other tribal
leaders, his swords, his mounts, the pain he suffered on his death bed, his favorite food, his
lineage down to Abraham, his tribal affiliations, etc. It must be noted here, that there are some
crucial events that are not included in Ibn Sa‛d‘s Sīra, such as the banishment of Muḥammad and
his followers to Mecca‘s rugged outskirts. It seems that Ibn Sa‛d meant for his Sīra to be a
compilation of ḥadīths related to Muḥammad‘s life that were of non-legalistic nature. Ibn Sa‛d‘s
Sīra is unique in this regard, a mine of information about Muḥammad the person, the leader, and
the prophet, as opposed to Muḥammad the teacher and the law giver who dominates the
contemporary legalistic compilations. Therefore, Ibn Sa‘d‘s biography of Muḥammad can be
considered to be a good reflection of how an entire generation (late second/early third) viewed
the founder of Islam.

1
 That being said, it is the fragmentary nature of Muḥammad‘s biographies (Sīra and
Maghāzī), and of his tradition (Ḥadīth), that makes the portrait of Muḥammad as seen by
contemporaries of Ibn Sa‛d look like a collage of partial portraits drawn by different
communities at different periods during the first two Islamic centuries. Therefore, in order to
introduce some order and coherence to this medley of portraits, I group these images into major
types (Abbott, 2002, p. 45 and pp. 129—131 for the definition of types; Williams, 2006 for the
supernatural type). There is no proof yet that Muḥammad was all these types to all Muslims at a
certain time during the first two centuries after his death. But certainly, second and third century
Muslims drew their varied perceptions of Muḥammad from these types. Hereafter, we name six
main types: Muḥammad the human, the prophet, the priest, the holy-man, the shaman, and the
tribal leader. Within each type we name several individual images.
Muḥammad the human
The Qur‘ān stressed the human nature of God‘s prophet, Muḥammad (Q. 18:110) ―say: I am
but a human like you who receives a message from God.‖ The tradition, including the KTK, has
not failed to stress this fact too (Ibn Sa‛d, 2, 205 for Abū Bakr famous funerary speech). Ibn Sa‛d
reports that Muḥammad‘s youngest wife, ‛Ā‘isha, stressed just that fact to a person who inquired
about Muḥammad‘s daily activities at home, probably imagining a superhuman: ―he did what
any of you would do; he patched his dress and sewed his sandals‖ (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 275). The KTK
portrays Muḥammad as fully human with desires and pains, and even some vanities; according to
‛Ā‘isha ―he used to like three things: fragrant oil, women, and food‖ (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 304-305).
Muḥammad is portrayed in the KTK as a virtuous person in his essence and not only
masquerading as such. Ibn Sa‛d quotes his wife ‛Ā‘isha describing the person she knew at home
as exceeding ―all people in virtue, for he did no evil, said no evil, was not a marketplace raucous
person, and did not return injury with an equal one; but used to pardon and forgive‖ (Ibn Sa‛d, 1,
274). When his status as God‘s messenger inspired awe in his interlocutors, Muḥammad was
quick, as is reported in the KTK, to point out that ―I am not a king but the son of a woman from
Quraysh who used to eat dried meat‖ (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 21). Ibn Sa‛d reports an eye-witness‘s account
that described Muḥammad‘s family abode as being made of ―sundried bricks, with rooms
separated by palm leaves plastered with mud‖ (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 387).
Muḥammad the prophet
Muḥammad is usually referred to as the messenger of God or as the prophet of God. Muslim
scholars think that a messenger is a prophet with a book containing a divine revelation and/or
law; hence the Islamic belief that Muḥammad is the last and greatest of God‘s messengers (Uri
Rubin, 2009, 4, 289—307). In the KTK, we do not see Muḥammad exercising his prophetic
vocation independently of his main task as the carrier of a divine message warning the human
race of God‘s judgment. Nonetheless, being God‘s messenger does not contradict, but is rather
validated by, foretelling the future through his own dreams. Ibn Sa‛d reports that Muḥammad
predicted the Muslims‘ defeat at the battle of Uḥud in a dream. His interpretation of the dream is
seen as an indication of his prophecy (Ibn Sa‛d, 2, 29).
It is very clear in the Qur‘ān that Islam recognized Muḥammad to be one in a long line of
biblical prophets, starting with Adam. Ibn Sa‛d starts his Sīra with several sections connecting
Muḥammad‘s genealogy to the main biblical prophets starting with Adam, then Idrīs, Noah,
Abraham, and Ishmael the son of Abraham who is considered to be the father of all Arabs (Ibn
Sa‛d, 1, 22, 34, 39, 41, and 45—49). Like all biblical prophets in the line of Abraham,

2
Muḥammad was carefully selected by God for a special mission: ―God has chosen Ishmael from
Abraham‘s children, the tribe of Kināna from Ishmael‘s children, [the tribe of] Quraysh from
Kināna, the clan of Banū Hāshim from Quraysh, and has chosen me from Banū Hāshim‖ (Ibn
Sa‛d, 1, 17-18). U. Ruben believes that Muḥammad‘s life story closely follows a biblical model:
The first phase of the narrative model 1) starts with events announcing the birth of God‘s chosen
(Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 82); 2) then proceeds to attestations of the young boy‘s future prophethood (Ibn
Sa‛d, 1, 104); 3) it ends with the purification of his heart thus completing his preparation for the
heavy burden of prophethood (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 119-120). The second phase of the model 1) starts
with the revelation of God‘s message to a frightened future prophet (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 149—154); 2)
then a period of persecution and trials tests the devotion of the new prophet to his assigned task
(Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 162—4); 3) the phase ends with the granting of salvation, which came in
Muḥammad‘s case as a triumph over all his enemies and their subjugation to his and hence to
God‘s will. All of these elements are present in Ibn Sa‛d‘s Sīra in different places. Finally, like
Joshua who led the Israelites in their conquest of the holy land, Muḥammad is portrayed as a
warrior prophet. After his followers urged a hesitant Muḥammad to fight Quraysh, they had
doubts about forcing an action that God and his prophet may not have wanted. At that moment,
Ibn Sa‛d portrays a fully armored Muḥammad whose decision to fight is not a mere human
opinion (Ibn Sa‛d, 2, 35).
Muḥammad‘s greatest prophecy was the warning that God‘s judgment is nearing and that
what can guarantee his people a happy ending in the afterlife is to recognize Allāh as their sole
deity (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 156-157). Ibn Sa‛d does not investigate the expansion of the scope of
Muḥammad‘s mission, when and how it happened. However, once he enumerates the ―signs of
prophecy‖ before and after the first revelation (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 119—134 and 134—149,
respectively), he gives several statements asserting the universality of Muḥammad‘s mission, and
even a reversal of the chronological order of the expansion of its scope; i.e. humanity is the real
target, whereas Quraysh becomes the target only when the rest of humanity does not respond to
the divine message that he carries (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 150).
As a prophet with the mission to build a godly community, the promulgation and the
application of divine law are seen as parts of Muḥammad‘s prophetic mission. The image of
Muḥammad as a carrier and interpreter of divine law is not clearly discernable in the KTK. There
are some rare exceptions; for example, there is the report about the boy who struck some dates
from a date tree and ate them. In this report Muḥammad is seen adjudicating a case and issuing a
ruling (Ibn Sa‛d, 7, 21).
Muḥammad the priest
The most intriguing and the least mentioned nowadays of Muḥammad's activities as seen in
the KTK are those that resemble the activities of an ordained priest. In the volume dedicated to
his companions, Muḥammad is often seen performing initiation rites for new converts and/or for
new born babies. When Ghāfil ibn Abī al-Bukayr converted ―the messenger of God renamed him
‛Āqil‖ (Ibn Sa‛d, 3, 297). Other renaming cases have definitely an Islamic tone, for example,
when Muḥammad renames ‛Abd al-Ka‛ba ibn ‛Awf into ‛Abd al-Raḥmān ibn ‛Awf, the famous
companion (Ibn Sa‛d, 3, 92). We also see Muḥammad ―baptize‖ new born babies by putting
pieces of dates that he has already chewed on in their mouths (taḥnīk) and then by giving them a
name and a surname (Ibn Sa‛d, 5, 55-6). We also see Muḥammad blessing young children by
spitting in their mouths and praying for them (Ibn Sa‛d, 5, 17). In the case of older boys, the
blessing takes the form of putting the hand on their head and uttering a prayer. Ḥidhyam became

3
a healer by virtue of Muḥammad‘s touch (Ibn Sa‛d, 7, 51). Muḥammad does not only bless
persons, he also blesses watering wells, by spitting in them after drinking from their water (Ibn
Sa‛d, 1, 390).
We also see Muḥammad in the KTK performing special prayers connected with times of
personal or communal distress; such as a prayer for rain when there is a drought (Ibn Sa‛d, 1,
226), a prayer for healing when someone is sick, and a prayer for nourishment when someone is
poverty stricken and hungry. Since they concern specific individuals, the last two cases are
accompanied with a ritualistic passing of the right hand on the afflicted individual‘s head or body
(Ibn Sa‛d, 7, 21; and 2, 164). Performing the final rites for dying and/or dead persons is a
sacrament usually reserved for priests. In Ibn Sa‛d‘s Sīra, we often see Muḥammad perform
these rites (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 197; 3, 459; and 3, 182); especially for ―martyrs‖ who fell in battles
while fighting the early community‘s enemies, the infidels (Ibn Sa‛d, 3, 9; 3, 89-90; and 3, 34).
Muslims can do penance either in the form of a sacrifice or by giving alms. In ancient
religions, sacrifice is associated with priests. In the KTK we see Muḥammad himself perform the
sacrifice that is incumbent upon every Muslim at the end of the annual pilgrimage (Ibn Sa‛d, 1,
191-192; and 2, 73). He also imposes on and collects alms (ṣadaqāt) from new converts (Ibn
Sa‛d, 1, 265).
In all three monotheistic religions the sermon is an integral part of worship that is usually
relegated to the priest. During his life time, Muḥammad was his fledgling community‘s
sermoner. Ibn Sa‛d reports in the Sīra that Muḥammad used to deliver the Friday sermon
standing and leaning on an old tree trunk (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 192). As a sermoner, we also see
Muḥammad warning his community of God‘s wrath, explaining God‘s creation to them, and
relating pious stories that resemble those found in the Book of Genesis (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 23 for the
creation of Adam; and 1, 24-25 for the primal sin). A sermoner is in fact a teacher, and one of
Muḥammad‘s most prevalent images is that of his community‘s great and first teacher, who
taught them how to perform the different rituals and who taught them God‘s way, that is, the law
(Ibn Sa‛d, 3, 462 for the report by Sa‛īd ibn al-Musayyab about Sa‛d ibn ‛Ubāda‘s inquiry
concerning ṣadaqa).
Muḥammad the holy man
The holy man is a type of religious leadership that, according to Peter Brown, acquired a
special importance in Late Antiquity. The portrait drawn by Brown of the holy man is that of an
ascetic who had a great deal of charisma who mediated between people and the divine, and at
times between people and the state. He was a miracle worker, a healer, an arbiter in disputes, and
an intercessor with the divine, thus satisfying the need for a closer connection with the
otherworldly power not controlled by any religious structured institution. The epitome of the
holy man was the figure of Jesus who opposed the structured rabbinate and performed miracles
for individuals. Islam appeared and took shape in the atmosphere of the late antique Middle East.
We in fact find a large number of reports in the KTK that portray Muḥammad as a holy man, just
as described by Peter Brown.
Late antique holy men mortified the body and saw in the pain of sickness an opportunity to
emulate the passion of Christ on the cross. In the KTK, we encounter several reports showing
Muḥammad silently handling the pain of sickness and claiming that ―the believer‘s affliction is
more severe for it is a penance‖ (Ibn Sa‛d, 2, 159—162). The other and most prominent feature
of holy men was the performance of miracles. Healing the sick through medicine was not a

4
miracle, but achieving this goal with a mere touch of the hand was certainly so. We see
Muḥammad in the KTK perform a good number of these extraordinary acts: he heals
conjunctivitis (ramad) with saliva; he heals impetigo (qūbā‘), baldness, and tumor (waram) with
a touch; he even restores a gouged eye to its socket (Ibn Sa‛d, 2, 85; 5, 57; 8, 198; and 1, 147,
respectively).
Muḥammad the shaman
Healing the sick with a touch was a miracle associated with a saint or a holy man; however
healing using a medicine was something usually associated with healers and shamans. These
were professionals who could tame natural and supernatural resources and put them in the
service of humans. In the KTK, we see Muḥammad behaving like a healer, a magician, or a
practitioner of the occult (we have already seen him interpret dreams and predict the future of
children). In many reports we see him diagnose a disease and prescribe a cure for it (Ibn Sa‛d, 1,
263; 3, 108; and 3, 327-328). We also see him transform a tree branch into a sharp sword, tell
that the meal presented to him was poisoned, and foretell the appearance of a daemon (Ibn Sa‛d,
1, 147; 2, 154; 3, 190, respectively).
Muḥammad the leader
In the Meccan chapters of the Qur‘ān the Prophet Muḥammad appears as a preacher with a
calling. In the Medinan chapters, his image and discourse change to those of a community leader
endowed with divine support. He is called upon to arbitrate disputes and dispense justice; he
leads his community into battles, distributes spoils after these battles, consults with other
prominent members of the community before making a decision, asks for financial support, and
collects alms as penance from the faithful. We see these images, and more, in Ibn Sa‛d‘s Sīra and
also in the biographies of Muḥammad‘s companions in the rest of the KTK.
The first requirement in an Arabian tribal chief was a real or an imagined pedigree, that is, a
known and prestigious lineage. The first sixty pages of Ibn Sa‛d‘s Sīra (in the Leiden edition of
the KTK) are concerned with exactly that (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 17-18). Upon his awaited arrival in
Medina, Muḥammad immediately organized his new community by establishing bonds of
brotherhood between members of the Meccan Muhājirīn (Immigrants) and members of the
Medinan Anṣār (Helpers) to replace the tribal and familial bonds, lost because of leaving Mecca
and severing ties with its inhabitants. He then ordered and supervised the task of building the
communal centerpiece, i.e. the mosque (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 183-4).
As the supreme leader of his community, Muḥammad is also seen dispatching expeditions
and leading troops into battle (Ibn Sa‛d, 2, 3). He is the commander who inspects the troops,
positions them for battle, designates the flag carriers, and decides on the battle cries, shi‛ār (Ibn
Sa‛d, 2, 30 and 110). After the battle, he is the one to divide the spoils, and to order the
appropriate burial for the fallen (Ibn Sa‛d, 2, 22; 3, 423).
As the head of a young but expanding state, Muḥammad takes a seal (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 198); has
scribes; sends letters to rulers of neighboring states and receives gifts from them (Ibn Sa‛d, 1,
198 and 200); receives delegations of tribes and emissaries of rulers and bestows gifts on them
(Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 198—221; 1, 222—269); sends tax collectors (taxes were actually collected as
alms, i.e. ṣadaqāt) to the subjected provinces and tribes (Ibn Sa‛d, 1, 224; 4, 183); makes treaties
with tribes and rulers promising property to allies and offering protection to subordinates (Ibn
Sa‛d, 1, 204). Certainly, Muḥammad the leader is also worthy of the many elegiac poems

5
lamenting his death and extolling his many virtues as was the custom in Arabia (Ibn Sa‛d, 2,
244—253).
By Ahmad Nazir Atassi
Bibliography
Abbott, H. Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2002.
Atassi, A. N. ―The Transmission of Ibn Sa‛d‘s Biographical Dictionary Kitāb al-Ṭabaqāt al-
Kabīr.‖ Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 1 (3), 2012: 56—80.
Brown, Peter. "The Rise and Function of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity." The Journal of
Roman Studies 61, 1971: 80-101.
Ibn Sa‛d, Muḥammad. Biographien Muhammeds, seiner Gefährten und der späteren Träger des
Islams, bis zum Jahre 230 der Flucht. Edited by Eduard Sachau, 8 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1905–
1917.
Ibn Sa‛d, Muḥammad. Al-Ṭabaqāt al-Kubrā. Edited and prefaced by M. ‗Abd al-Qādir ‗Aṭā.
Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‛Ilmiyya, 1998.
Milby, Katherine A. The making of an image: the narrative form of Ibn Isḥāq's Sirat rasūl Allāh.
Master‘s Thesis. Georgia State University, 2008.
Motzki, Harald. The Biography of Muhammad: the Issue of the Sources. Boston: Brill, 2000.
Peters, F. E. ―The Quest of the Historical Muḥammad.‖ International Journal of Middle East
Studies 23(3): 291—315.
Rubin, Uri. The eye of the Beholder: the Life of Muḥammad as Viewed by the Early Muslims - A
Textual Analysis. Princeton, N.J.: Darwin Press, 1995.
Rubin, Uri. "Prophets and Prophethood." Encyclopedia of the Qur’ān. Edited by Jane Dammen
McAuliffe. Georgetown University, Washington DC: Brill, 2009, vol. 4, pp. 289—307.
Williams, Rebecca R. An analysis of the supernatural archetype of the rophet uḥamma as
foun in the Sīra Ta'rī h an Tafsīr wor s of al-Ṭabarī an Ibn Kathīr. Dissertation. McGill
University, 2006.