Just as a great poet assembles their poem, Aslan has done the same, producing nothing short of a masterpiece. Thoroughly analytical, wonderfully written and well presented, this is one for an audience of the learned community of the complex intellectual world of the 20th century.

Not an apologetic, clearly objective, this book entertains people of Muslim faith and every other faith, especially the learned of the Judeo-Christian community and anyone else interested in learning about the origins, evolution and future of Islam.

I noticed some of the reviews indicate that this book doesn't entirely present what Muslims believe in. It is true in a sense and it could use a bit more of what Muslims would like to see presented to the world, as there are many beautiful aspects of the faith and tradition that would impress any reader, but given the audience it covers, it does the job, marvelously.

As a Muslim brought up in the west, I personally embarked on studying the origins and evolution of what is the complex representation of Islam we see today. I studied Sufism, Shism, and Sunni Islam in as much detail and objectivity as I could, and most the material in Aslan's book agrees what my personal findings.

This is my personal observation and I can't speak for any of the Muslim readers, but this probably goes for many; Aslan has re-presented Islam in the most common everyday English language of today, the language that most of us grew up using and brought everything into context, and for that, I am full of gratitude.

I look forward to anything Aslan writes, I've checked his website, read most of his articles and listened to all the podcasts and the public presences on youtube. A very gifted intellectual, he is indeed.

Aslan meticulously develops the story of the birth of Muhammad and Islam in the 7th century, then the tempo speeds as he closes in our modern times. He romanticizes and brings a certain elegance while defending this convoluted religion. The dates are very much in debate, even so, he begins with the pre-Islam years of paganism (of course we were all lost before Islam), the many religions of the day and the off-shoots. Then Aslan traces back to Muhammad's childhood before progressing into his adulthood. (Muhammad is hardly the great prophet and man of God made out to be.) Then it is on to his successors and the development of the Sunni, Shia, and other factions. He uses many references to the Quran, but obviously uses fiction to fill the holes in telling the story. Although, in some areas of this study it has opened my eyes positively to who Muhammad was. There is an extensive bibliography and your knowledge of Arabic will surely be improved.

After doing some investigating on Aslan, I find who he associates with to be biased and the liberal media (none from the other side) reflects an apologetic attitude in their writings toward him. This book is targeted towards the West in hopes for appeasement. His beliefs are subtle in the book, but with these two references I have concluded that he is of the liberalized Shia sect, where he believes in a theological pluralism (many religions lead to God), the Quaran is divinely inspired by the one God, and Muhammad is a true prophet. Aslan is an apologist who does not state any of the conflicts or contradictions with the New and Old Testemant----who needs Christ then. Though he does admit the Quran has evolved to take its present shape and interpretations are tearing the Muslim community apart; a reformation, if you will, is needed for them too someday.

For this is really the heart of the matter, it is "not so much a cultural conflict as a religious one; that we are not in the midst of a 'class of civilization', but rather a 'class of monotheisms.'" In-fighting between Muslims is just as much a part or more of the terrorism we see. It was the extremists and the radicals who twisted the Koran, Muhammadins were not the radicals. That may be so, but why then is it so easily corrupted then? Aslan also names scholars who have misrepresented Muhammad's history, but again he forgets the ones who understand the errors.

Did we supply biological weapons to Iraq? Yes, in part, not directly, but only dual use chemicals that had only the potential. Other nations were also involved. Aslan only gives us part of the facts. Still, I don't deny it wasn't a mistake. Constructing an Islamic Democracy (or any kind) will be difficult; we need to concentrate on freedom first.

Islam is a religion of works and says there are many ways to God. They accept Christ but deny who He "really" was. The problem with excepting Jesus as just many in a line of great prophets is to force the Muslim to believe in a liar.

Wish you well and blessings
Scott

Aslan's book provides a wonderful historical narrative of the origins of Islam and how history has shaped it into the religion it is today. His insight into major events over the centuries and how they relate to our current climate is quite elegant. He moves from past to present quite fluently. I recommend this book to anyone with a love of history who seeks a greater understanding of Islam than is provide in the evening news.

Aslan's book provides a wonderful historical narrative of the origins of Islam and how history has shaped it into the religion it is today. His insight into major events over the centuries and how they relate to our current climate is quite elegant. He moves from past to present quite fluently. I recommend this book to anyone with a love of history who seeks a greater understanding of Islam than is provide in the evening news.

This book was never delivered and e-mails to the seller elicited no response. DO NOT do business with this seller.

A must read by everyone, especially policy makers,it provides a clear, genuine,and wise explanation of Islam, the peaceful religion, which has been hijacked by terror, fear and hate. I highly recommend the book for every person interested in learning about the true Islam.

A scholarly book - but far from the dry prose of acadamia. I felt it read like a historical novel, however, it is an expertly researched lesson in understanding the most misunderstood world religion.

While I am familiar with the basic outlines of the history of Islam my knowledge is really confined to the effect of its expansions its impact on non Islamic countries. What I was looking for was one which focused on Islam itself, and the reviews of "No god but God" were positive enough for me to select that book as a starting point.

In the preface to this book, Reza Aslan discusses recent events perpetrated by Islamic terrorists, and argues that rather than there being a "Clash of Civilizations", what we are now experiencing is an Islamic reformation similar to that which occurred in the Christian world 500 years ago. In the prologue, he states that "Religion, it must be understood, is not faith. Religion is the story of faith. It is an institutionalized system of symbols and metaphors (read rituals and myths) that provides a common language with which a community of faith can share with each other their numinous encounter with the Divine Presence. Religion is concerned not with genuine history, but with sacred history, which does not course through time like a river .....". The purpose of his book, he states, is to recount "the story of Islam" which will support his thesis that we are indeed experiencing an Islamic Reformation, which will be every bit as terrifying as that experienced in the Christian world.

Chapter 1 "The Sanctuary in the Desert" is an informative review of religious practices in pre-Islamic Arabia which is referred to as the Jahiliyyah, "the Time of Ignorance". This chapter discusses the major elements of the main competing religions of that era - various versions of Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, which intermingled in a region dominated by a firmly henotheistic paganism. Out of this pluralistic environment there emerged an Arabic monotheistic movement called Hanifism, which clearly had an influence on the Prophet Muhammed in his youth.

Chapter 2 "Keeper of the Keys" recounts the story of the Prophet's life in Mecca, before and after he started to receive the divine revelations in year 610 CE, and up to the point where he is forced in 622 CE to flee Mecca for Yathrib. This chapter describes how the Quryash clan came to dominate the city of Mecca through their control of the Ka'ba, and why the Prophet was such a threat to their rule.

Chapter 3 "The City of the Prophet" describes the dominant clans of the oasis of Yathrib (not yet known as Medina), and the growth after his arrival there of his small community of followers to whom he was the Prophet/Lawgiver who spoke with the authority of the one God. It was in this capacity that he developed his Law of Retribution, and furthered his egalitarian ideals.

Chapter 4 "Fight in the Way of God" describes the various attacks of the Quryash to suppress his movement, and their eventual surrender and conversion to Islam in 630 CE. This is an important chapter because it describes in some detail his relationship with the Jewish clans, and the execution of the Banu Qurayza after the Battle of the Trench in 627 CE.

Chapter 5 "The Rightly Guided Ones" describes the events of the four Caliphate successors to Muhammad, the last three of whom were all assassinated. It was under the 2nd Caliph Umar, that Islam expanded so rapidly, with the defeat of the Byzantine army in southern Syria, the capture of the Damascus, the defeat of the Iranian forces at Qadsiyyah, and the conquest of Egypt, Libya, and Jerusalem. With the election of the Uthman as the third Caliph, the Quryash are established as the rulers of Islam which triggers his own assassination, and sows the seed for the civil war that occurs after the assassination of the 4th Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib.

Chapter 6 "This Religion in a Science" is a step forward in time of about 150 years which describes the final struggle between the Caliphate and the Ulama over who has the control over the development of Islamic Theology and Law. This includes a discussion of the Five Pillars of Islam which constitute the principal ritual activities of Muslim faith, as well as the major Islamic schools of theology.

Chapter 7 "In the Footsteps of Martyrs" steps back in time and describes the suppression of the Banu Hashim, the family of Muhammad and Caliph Ali, and the execution of the prophet's grandson at Karbala in 680 CE. The rest of the chapter describes the development of Shi'ism, - from the Penitents of Karbala to the advent of Ayatollah Khomeini.

Chapter 8 "Stain your Prayer Rug with Wine" - The Sufi Way - describes the development of Sufism, the term given to Islam's complex and diverse mystical tradition.

Chapter 9 "An Awakening in the East" - discusses the development of the Islamic response to Colonialism during the 19th and 20th centuries in India, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia

Chapter 10 "Slouching Toward Medina" - discusses the events of past 30 years in Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, and the author's contention that with the events of Sept 11/2001 and its aftermath, we are already experiencing the early stages of the Islamic Reformation.

The book includes a useful 6 page glossary of important words, extensive notes with many references to important works on Islam, a 6 page bibliography of works consulted, and a detailed index of places and people.

As can be seen from this overview, this not the complete history of the Islamic world. Chapters 1 - 5 are informative in explaining the establishment of Islamic faith and theology in the first 50 years of its existence. Chapters 6- 8 are helpful in describing the elements of the three major streams of Islamic thought - Sunni, Shi'ite, and Sufi, while Chapters 9 and 10 provide a useful overview of the Islamic response to European colonialism and the re-establishment of its place in the modern world. However, the details of the expansion of Islam during the Ummayad and Abbasid Dynasties from 660 to 850 CE are only briefly referred to, and there is no discussion whatsoever on any later event in the Islamic world until about 1800 CE.

The author states in the prologue that "This book is not just a critical reexamination of the origins and evolution of Islam .... it is above all else an argument for reform", and it is important to bear this in mind as one follows the events described in the book. While it only partially met my expectations, it was valuable in instructing me on how the struggles of today relate to the first 50 years of Islam, and I have a better understanding of the lives of the Prophet and his immediate successors, the establishment of Islamic law, and the basic differences between the three streams of Islamic thought. The book is well written and easy to read, and I believe it to be a balanced introduction to Islam. Because it was not quite what I was looking for, I only give it four stars, but I do recommend it as a starting point for readers who are not of the Islamic faith and who wish to obtain a general understanding of the origins and evolution of that faith.

In these times, when Islam is so poorly understood in the West, any decent attempt to explain the history and theology of this growing religion should be embraced. In this book, subtitled "The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam," Mr. Aslan had made more than a decent attempt. He has done excellent work that deserves to be read.

Starting with a brief outline of the pre-Islamic situation in Arabia, Mr. Aslan quickly progresses to the story of Muhammad and he spends better than a third of his book describing the Prophet and his impact. Then, in the chapters that follow, he discusses the successors to Muhammad and their impact on the development of theology and law. He describes the concept of jihad as well as the divisions into Sunni, Shi'ia and Sufi, describing their differences quite clearly. Finally, he spends a couple chapters trying to help the reader understand why we are in the clash we are in today by going through the impact of colonialism on Muslims and finishing with an eye on Islam today.

It is a very comprehensive and easy-to-follow history and Mr. Aslan is to be commended. In general, he stays away from judgements and focuses on trying to give us an objective history. In fact, if anything, he is skewed to the West--at times too kind to America and too apologetic for Islam. Not that there is any excuse for terrorism--there isn't--but the West has made mistakes in dealing with the Islamic world and this, too, needs to be acknowledged. Still, overall, Mr. Aslan has stayed away from anything that would be too controversial and, if this book doesn't have the depth and detail of some others, it is an excellent guide to the basics for any reader.

So far I am half-way done with the book and I am really enjoying it. Reza has done an outstanding job.

I agree with Mr. Lamendola on how well written this book is. It is not dry and pragmatic like most other historical texts are. Sentences are remarkably easy to read, I never had to read any sentence twice!

Having said that, it was very refreshing to read a social, political and cultural history of Islam from a Muslim writer. It seems that the only objective and unbiased, negatively or positively, history Islam is written by people who do not belong to the religion. Nothing wrong with not being a Muslim, but a Muslim perspective is important to reveal the cultural and religious background of the story being told. Muslim writers tend to drown their account in traditionalistic jargon in which religious figures are depicted as divine and infallible beings. Not this book.

The book starts with Pre-Islamic Arabia. With a language that is simple and effective, not devoid of imagery but not drowned in it either, the author explains the cultural, religious, social and economical setting of the birth of Islam. Author insists that no religious movement, Islam included, is born in a cultural vacuum. Large part of the book is dedicated to the early history of Islam, with a lot of time spent on the central importance of Ka'ba, indeed this is the only imagery the author keeps bringing up throughout his book.

The book then talks about the different "sects" of Islam which have their root in, unlike Christianity, politics not theology. It also explains the causes of the rise of sufism as well as other ideologies in Islam.

At the end of the book there is a brief history of struggle of political reforms in major Muslim countries around the world including Egypt, Iran and Pakistan. Also included are brief histories of Ikhwan, Ikhwanal Muslimeen, Al-Quaida and present day Saudi Arabia.

The book ends with a hopeful, and naively cheerful, note that we are living in the age of Islamic reform.

I don't agree with the author on all topics, however I thoroughly enjoyed the cohesive and chronologically arranged history of political and ideological struggles within the religion. If you can't read long fictional novels like I, this book is for you!!

Reza takes a measured look at a combustible topic and presents it in a way that is even-handed, sensible, intelligent and should enlighten us all. The narrative is so well-written that the scholarship of Reza's research is easily digested. The prologue alone is worth the price of admission. ... Until we begin to discuss religion in a sane and calm manner -- be it Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, Etc. -- the world will continue to be a violent and unpredictable place to inhabit. For the sake of your children and your children's children, please read Reza's book.The Gospel of Father Joe: Revolutions and Revelations in the Slums of Bangkok

An Excellent and boldly accurate account of Islamic History. Reza Aslan has shown his depth of understanding of the crucial issues facing many Muslims today and has done an excellent service to address the misconceptions about Islam that are so rampant in the western world post 911.
No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam

First thing to note - Reza Aslan is not impartial, and those who complain about this are stating something obvious. In the prologue, Aslan clearly says "There are those who will call it an apology, but that is hardly a bad thing. An apology is a defense, and there is no higher calling than to defend one's faith, especially from ignorance and hate..."

The book itself is brilliant. I've read other introductory texts, like Karen Armstrong's Islam: A Short History (Modern Library Chronicles), which are good but basic. Somehow, Reza Aslan has taken the miscellaneous stories I heard in religious classes growing up and created a true narrative that spans from before Muhammad, through his life, and on to the initial splits and empires that accompanied the faith.

Here is where Aslan truly shines. Each chapter starts with the myth, the story. Then, he deconstructs it, going through the historical context of both the portrayed events and the resulting myths. This connection between religious text and history and back to religious belief is why I feel I learned more in this book than in any religion class I've attended.

The discussions on each major branch of Islam, Shia and Sunni, are well done, but the chapter on Sufism is a little fuzzy. Of course, the topic itself is hard to describe without really delving into detail, so it works as an introduction to the group. Hopefully this will help more people understand the difference between the groups and why the two have hostility towards each other even today.

The chapters on colonialism, the rise of more modern movements like Wahhabism and "modern" Islamic states, and a reformation are great for those who want to link the book to current events and understand the conflict within Islam today. It is crucial to note that these movements do run counter to mainstream Islam taken in the historical context, even though other reviewers seem to disagree.

P.S. - Even the notes section has some interesting addendums. If you really enjoy the book be sure to check it out.

First thing to note - Reza Aslan is not impartial, and those who complain about this are stating something obvious. In the prologue, Aslan clearly says "There are those who will call it an apology, but that is hardly a bad thing. An apology is a defense, and there is no higher calling than to defend one's faith, especially from ignorance and hate..."

The book itself is brilliant. I've read other introductory texts, like Karen Armstrong's Islam: A Short History (Modern Library Chronicles), which are good but basic. Somehow, Reza Aslan has taken the miscellaneous stories I heard in religious classes growing up and created a true narrative that spans from before Muhammad, through his life, and on to the initial splits and empires that accompanied the faith.

Here is where Aslan truly shines. Each chapter starts with the myth, the story. Then, he deconstructs it, going through the historical context of both the portrayed events and the resulting myths. This connection between religious text and history and back to religious belief is why I feel I learned more in this book than in any religion class I've attended.

The discussions on each major branch of Islam, Shia and Sunni, are well done, but the chapter on Sufism is a little fuzzy. Of course, the topic itself is hard to describe without really delving into detail, so it works as an introduction to the group. Hopefully this will help more people understand the difference between the groups and why the two have hostility towards each other even today.

The chapters on colonialism, the rise of more modern movements like Wahhabism and "modern" Islamic states, and a reformation are great for those who want to link the book to current events and understand the conflict within Islam today. It is crucial to note that these movements do run counter to mainstream Islam taken in the historical context, even though other reviewers seem to disagree.

P.S. - Even the notes section has some interesting addendums. If you really enjoy the book be sure to check it out.

Aslan's, No god but God, is a great introduction into the history of Islam. This is not a regular religious history book that you use only at 3am to help you sleep. On the contrary, his fluid writing style seamlessly takes you from pre-Islamic Arabia all the way to when Islam becomes an institution without making your eyelids close involuntarily. Islam in today's times is a sexy topic, almost the same way the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. Everybody and their grandma has an opinion on what many call an evil religion that over half the world's population calls their own.

Aslan (a devout Shi`ite) writes this book as a defense from, what he calls, "ignorance and hate". In order to grasp today's Islamic movements or the reformation of the religion itself, you need to understand Islam's history. You can tell he did enormous amounts of research and the conclusions or interpretations he arrives at are transparent and logical. At the end of the book, you will have a greater appreciation of the religion itself and toss aside the misguided rhetoric that proclaims that were in the midst of a clash of civilizations. This misguided rhetoric turns you away from the real "conflict"; which comes from those who want the power to interpret the religion.

Besides providing a terrific and insightful history of Islam, this book provides a great deal of history on the areas affected by the rise of Islam and how politics (especially colonialism) and religion coincided to create the Middle East we see today. Of course the rise of Islam has not been contained to the Middle East, and the brief coverage of areas outside the Middle East were equally enlightening. I found the authors indirect comparison of the challenges facing Islam today with the beginning of the Christian reformation movement at the end of the Dark Ages to be both effective, and somewhat heartening.

While the author has no qualms about stating his belief in Islam, he at no point attempts to proselytize, which in my opinion would have made this book uncomfortable, if not unbearable, to read.

Bottom line, I am not a history buff, and this book definitely falls outside of my normal reading, but I found it an excellent book in many respects. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the history of the Middle East, Islam, or those with an interest in current day political science of the region. The authors style makes it an easy read with the "page turner" feel of a fictional narrative.

I picked up this book because the reviews on the cover included the independent news paper... my requirements were to buy a book that is small enough to carry on the plane and is worth reading (while I love novels and fiction books, I think a moderate mix of various types of books, even considering travel periods, is essential)... additionally as a free thinker of muslim origin who can't read Arabic that well, I needed an english book of a remedial level concerning the subject (islam)... I imagine the author of this book makes no claim that his writing is meant for anyone else but those of us who possess little to no knowledge on the subject matter (or a non muslim audience), especially considering that he himself seems to lack so much of that required knowledge to errr... write a book? I knew I made a mistake when I read HIS introduction... I think any person of average intelligence and a mediocre knowledge of islam or have lived in that culture even for a short period of time would see right away that this book is written to appease a certain audience and apologize for islam... I am not sure what are aslan's academic credentials or his personal experiences but given that most of his references, in the book about arabs, muslims and islam were western writers, I fail to see his credibility... having been born a muslim or in a muslim country and lived "abroad" and write on the level of a high school student (thus making it easy for some of to "read") hardly makes you an expert on the subject matter... I am sorry but the required credentials and errr... intelligence, knowledge depth and experience are still required to attempt all of those "analysis" and "conclusions"...

I was surprised when I got to amazon and saw that the book had 4 stars. The shock subsided when I saw that most of the reviewers were non arabs and non muslims... nothing against who the reviewers are off course, but if you do not know the facts then you can't correctly judge the quality of the book. Yes, this book does read like a novel and it is easy reading, but I don't think this book was meant to be light reading for remedial non muslims... islam and the history of islam will take a lot more than 300 pages to write excluding any analysis, so clearly this book was not all inclusive, but I still see no point of writing this book... you can get more facts and more intelligent reading from wikipedia.

Going in I had so many questions about Islam. Admittedly, I know very little about the faith. With the current geopolitical circumstances I felt it necessary to initiate the process of learning something accurate and substantive about the religion and culture of Islam. I did not want to project any negative perceptions into my reading. Instead I wanted to take everything Mr. Aslan said at face value and weigh it out rationally. Sometimes it was easy, sometimes it was difficult.

First off, this book is an excellent read. As some reviewers have already noted Mr. Aslan is an exceptional writer. The text of this book flows with so much ease. His spirited recanting of battles in the Arabian dessert helps keep his work from feeling like some boring lecture pressed into a book. Overall these are the main impressions I received from this book:

1) Islam is just as much a set of political ideologies and frameworks as it is a religion of faith. Mr. Aslan outlines the various schools of thought Islam has produced over the centuries and the resulting (often violent) political movements they spawn. I read with interest Aslan's account of the scramble for power that took place after the Prophet's death. While Muhammad wields absolute power over the Companions in life, his death exposes distrust by many of the Companions toward his family. Fears of the political and economic power to be gained by the Ahl al-bayt (the people of the house of the Prophet) should his cousin/ son in law Ali gain power prompt many members of the Ummah to forge a campaign to suppress Ali. This split between the family of the Prophet and the other Companions is the genesis of the Shi'ite/ Sunni split. As Aslan shows this split would adopt its religious overtones later. However, political division seems to be the root of the split.

2) The chasm between what the Quran teaches and how it is interpreted seems to be quite large. Granted I have never picked up a copy of the Quran. So for this review I can only go off what Mr. Aslan cites. Judging from the various citations he chooses the Quran appears to teach egalitarianism, forgiveness, and harmony even with those who do not share the faith. More than once he cites Surah 2:256 that reads, "There can be no compulsion in religion." This verse is consistent with the "religion of peace" many Muslims insist they practice. However, the concept of infidels who must choose Islam or the sword had to come from somewhere. Since I have not read ALL of the Quran I can not conclude the Quran is free from this notion. Either Mr. Aslan cherry picked his verses or the religious clerics who interpret the scripture are twisting it to serve their own ambitions. To his credit Mr. Aslan writes at length on how politically driven clerics have distorted scripture to serve their own aims. If Mr. Aslan's portrait of the Quran is largely true, then any reformation of the faith will have to begin with fresher, more accurate(?) interpretation of its holy writ.

3) Lastly, Mr. Aslan's assertion that a democratically designed Islamic republic would have to balance secularization and pluralism against Sharia seems so ambitious it may be unrealistic. He states that in a situation where Islamic law collides with secular pluralism, pluralism should take precedent. Of all the concepts Mr. Aslan advances in this book that one caught me completely off guard. Maybe it is my unfamiliarity with the culture of Islam, but is seems like an Islamic republic would be unwilling to `erode God's law' for the sake of appeasing secular interests. Maybe it is better for Islamic countries seeking democracy to take Turkey's route and fashion a completely secular government. However, that would be next to impossible in many Muslim countries.

This book is a great introduction to the religion and culture of Islam. It will leave you asking more questions about this very complex and misunderstood faith. It will not erase all of Islam's negative perceptions by Westerners. It will not let the culture off the hook for the recent atrocities that have been connected to it. However, if the reader is willing it can begin the process of discovering the human face behind the headlines.

If your interest in Islam stems from the media attention the religion receives then this book is a wonderful way of learning about the beginning of it all. Aslan's work is clearly structured and unbiased. I wants the reader to understand the gentleness of the religion as well as the powerful protectiveness of the muslims that practise this faith.
War can be found within any religion, just look at the Crusades.
The book is a wonderful piece that I would highly recommend to people who would like to learn more and make their own opinion rather than rely on the views of others.

After 9.11, there has been a sudden obsession with Islam. The extreme right-wing media would like to portray the religion as spewing hate and preaching violence. But what is the truth? There are so many versions out there trying to explain Islam to you -- but as an ignorant person, how do you determine what is true and what is fiction?

My knowledge of Islam is practically nil. With growing interest in the religion and my curiosity to learn the origin and spiritual leanings of Islam and the reasons behind the fanaticisms that seem to pervade through a section of the middle east - I decided to read No God but God. Basically, I wanted to form my own opinion rather than being fed with half-baked truths by the media, erroneously termed as facts.

I should also confess - I chose this book because of the author. Reza Aslan has appeared on Real Time with Bill Maher and on the Daily Show. On these shows, he appeared intelligent, eloquent, and exuded a firm grasp of the politics and history of the underpinings of the Islamic movement and the religion itself.

Needless to say, I was impressed. I wikkipedia-ed and googled him; read through his website and discovered he was a scholar - a major plus. Obviously, there are many books out there on Islam. However, as a researcher myself, I decided to go with my kind. I was not wrong with my choice.

The book is very well written. At no time, do you feel that you are getting a boring history lesson. The information is overwhelming, but at the back of my mind, I kept thinking - Does the author have an ulterior motive? Is there a hidden agenda? Is he espousing something specific? Unfortunately, it is difficult to know because I have nothing to compare to. He is a research scholar not the average novelist and therefore, I am inclined to accept his explanations and historical accounts.

The book does not disappoint, it is a fascinating read. I learned a lot and now have a better understanding of the nature of Islam and also, why a faction of Muslims are imposing their myopic interpretation of Islam.

He does a great job in narrating and combining history with current happenings. He beautifully leads us through the origins of the Prophet, his beliefs, principles, and persuasions behind the characterization of the Quran. You also read about the Ka'ba at Mecca, its inextricable link with the origins of Islam and the politics of the rulers that came and went. You learn about the struggle to dissociate Islam, the religion, from the politics of establishing law and governance, as espoused by the various Islamic sects. And finally, you learn about the continuing struggle - as Islam and its believers unravel what the Prophet truly hoped to establish and the future direction of this massive religious movement.

What I found most interesting was the confluence of the origins and teachings of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. Ironically, despite the clear commonalities between these main religions, there is so much strife and hate.

I highly recommend this book and look forward to reading more of Reza's work.

[...]

As a Muslim, I read this book with interest. In NO GOD BUT GOD, Reza Aslan attempts to narrate and analyze the Origins and Evolution of Islam, and a vision of its Future.

Starting with an exploration of Pre-Islamic Arabia, he details the life of the Prophet Muhammad (s), and follows up with the 4 Rightly Guided Caliphs. He then focuses on the evolution of Islamic thought, including the development of the Ulama in Sunni Islam, and the development of other schools of thought/sects such as Shiism and Sufism. He finishes by detailing the response of the Muslim world to colonialism, and modern issues today, especially Islam's struggle towards democracy.

Aslan aims to portray what he feels is an 'objective' portrayal of Islamic history, by correcting what he feels are errors by past scholars, especially Muslim scholars with idealized views. However, ultimately, he is not very successful in his quest. While he criticizes early Islamic historians for portraying '9th century Baghdad' rather than '7th century Madina', one can argue that his view of Islamic history is '21 century American' rather than '7th century Madinan.' His biases are evident, and are typical of 21st century America and the West: Denial of supernatural events, resistance to established historical (especially religious) authority, preference for free-flowing spirituality versus formalized doctrines of law, and importance given to issues such as democracy. (Note, as an American, I share some of these biases, but its important to note their existence as biases in a quest for objectivity.)

Aslan usually starts each section by presenting 'the idealized' view of a topic, as narrated by early Muslim scholars (what he terms as 'myth') and then presents what he believes 'really happened' (history). Myth typically includes miracles, and heroic portrayals of people involved. Those inclined to believe in miracles (and I am one) may have difficulty with this approach, as he flatly says that it doesn't matter whether or not miracles happened (ie, whether Jesus raised the dead) but rather, what role such myths play in shaping the beliefs of a particular religious community. I heartily disagree with Aslan here- I believe it matters a great deal whether or not the beliefs of a religious community are shaped by actual historical events (including wonderous, amazing ones) or whether such beliefs are based on, in the end, lies and falsehood. In any case, Aslan was not there to witness events such as Lazarus rising from the dead, and neither were the early historians, so ultimately, it is up to each person to make up their own mind about the actual historicity of such supernatural events.

Aslan also occasionally over stretches himself in his attempts to deny miracles. For instance, he suggests that its unlikely that the Prophet (s) was illiterate, because as a merchant, he supposedly had to be able to read and write. Clearly Aslan has not spent much time with illiterate people- and is unable to recognize just how much these people can do without reading and writing. (illiterate people today are health workers treating pneumonia and malaria using complex medical regimens, and performing internationally recognized research, including recording results, about endangered species).

However, I must admit that I greatly appreciated Aslan's candor about the religious personalities involved. Sunni Islamic scholarship presents early Islamic historical figures (such as the first 4 Caliphs) and the early Muslim community as incredible, nearly error free, almost absolutely perfect, human beings- almost super-beings. I was always struck at the incongruity of such idealized descriptions and the fact that within a few decades after the death of the Prophet (s), the early Islamic community entered a massive civil war from which one could argue Islam never recovered. I wondered, how could such a supposedly perfect community made with such supposedly perfect people get into such a serious mess so quickly? Reading Aslan's descriptions (which included Sunni, Shii, and western sources) of the personalities involved was very helpful in this regard: they weren't perfect people, but were deeply religious, well meaning people who, yes, had their share of faults, misunderstandings, and disagreements (about Islam and a lot of other things) which built up over the years, and in the chaotic transition after the Prophet's death, exploded into civil war.

Aslan is unable to hide his obvious disdain of the Ulama (Islamic Scholars who have codified Islamic Law, or Shariah). He paints them entirely in a negative light, as a power hungry, control-mad group which has stifled all flexibility from the religion. While this view undoubtedly has a good deal truth to it (I am extremely sympathetic), it must also be admitted that the Scholars did a great deal of work to preserve the religion, and its history, without which we may not even have the religion today, and certainly would know far less about the events surrounding its birth and rise. Aslan is equality negative about the Ayatollah Khomeni, who he feels promised democracy but in reality bamboozled the Iranian people into accepting a theocracy (in reality, a dictatorship under his rule) through his powerful persona. Aslan's views on Khomeni are understandable given the fact that he lived his early life in Iran, experienced the hope that the Iranian people felt during the revolution, only to have to flee the country with his family.

On the other hand, Aslan is quite positive about Sufism, the spiritual branch of Islam, defending all its variations, despite admitting that at least some Sufi beliefs don't square very well with the basic Islamic creed, "No God but God." Aslan correctly states that Sufism is quite complex, and is not generalizable. However, he occasionally tries to generalize anyway, with a view of defending Sufism against the barrage of negative criticism it has received for the unorthodox views of some of its branches. However, this approach leads to occasional contradictions: for example Aslan states that all Sufis follow Islamic acts of worship such as 5 daily prayers, but then also says that some Sufis believe acts of religious worship are only important for the masses, and others believe it is a shell that can be cast off once deeper layers of spirituality are realized.

Aslan's biases are finally represented in his vision of Islam's future. He clearly believes in Islamic pluralism, and believes that it can best be represented by a democracy. Furthermore, he believes that when God's law and the popular will contradict, the popular will should win out. The limits of Islamic pluralism is hotly debated today in the Muslim world, but for me, the claim, "No God but God" is the key to Islam, along with the belief in Muhammad (s) Prophethood. These two aspects should be the backbone of anyone calling themselves a Muslim.

The issue of popular sovereignty over divine law (properly understood and contextualized) is considerably more complex. I ultimately agree with Aslan, one cannot force on a community any law, including a law from God, over a people who do not believe in it, or do not want it implemented in their community. However, Aslan leaves it there, as if that is the end of the story. I would argue that every effort should be made to make the community see the wisdom of divine laws, emphasizing positive consequences in implementing them (improved justice, equality, social harmony, etc) and pointing out negatives of not following them (chaotic society, broken down families, etc), both in this world and in the afterlife.

As other reviewers mention, Aslan is a good writer. His writing is clear and he is able to explain complex concepts deftly. I actually found his 'idealized' sections (the 'myths') often even better written and more powerful than this supposedly objective analysis that follows: his 'myths,' whether of the Prophet (s), the companions, the Caliphs, or Sufi legends are dramatic and pulsating with life. After reading them, it was a bit of a let down (and at times, even irritating) to be told, 'well this is what REALLY happened' and reading an analysis of events that I did not find objective. Aslan should try his hand at fiction!

As a Muslim, I read this book with interest. In NO GOD BUT GOD, Reza Aslan attempts to narrate and analyze the Origins and Evolution of Islam, and a vision of its Future.

Starting with an exploration of Pre-Islamic Arabia, he details the life of the Prophet Muhammad (s), and follows up with the 4 Rightly Guided Caliphs. He then focuses on the evolution of Islamic thought, including the development of the Ulama in Sunni Islam, and the development of other schools of thought/sects such as Shiism and Sufism. He finishes by detailing the response of the Muslim world to colonialism, and detailing modern issues today (struggle with modernization, fundamentalism) and struggle towards democracy.

Aslan aims to portray what he feels is an 'objective' portrayal of Islamic history, by correcting what he feels are errors by past scholars, especially Muslim scholars with idealized views. However, ultimately, he is not very successful in his quest. While he criticizes early Islamic historians for portraying '9th century Baghdad' rather than '7th century Madina', one can argue that his view of Islamic history is '21 century American' rather than '7th century Madinan.' His biases are evident, and are typical of 21st century America and the West: Denial of supernatural events, resistance to established historical (especially religious) authority, preference for free-flowing spirituality versus formalized doctrines of law, and importance given to issues such as democracy. (Note, as an American, I share some of these biases, but its important to note their existence as biases in a quest for objectivity.)

Aslan usually starts each section by presenting 'the idealized' view of a topic, as narrated by early Muslim scholars (what he terms as 'myth') and then presents what he believes 'really happened' (history). Myth typically includes miracles, and heroic portrayals of people involved. Those inclined to believe in miracles (and I am one) may have difficulty with this approach, as he flatly says that it doesn't matter whether or not miracles happened (ie, whether Jesus raised the dead) but rather, what role such myths play in shaping the beliefs of a particular religious community. I heartily disagree with Aslan here- I believe it matters a great deal whether or not the beliefs of a religious community are shaped by actual historical events (including wonderous, amazing ones) or whether such beliefs are based on, in the end, lies and falsehood. In any case, Aslan was not there to witness events such as Lazarus rising from the dead, and neither were the early historians, so ultimately, it is up to each person to make up their own mind about the actual historicity of such supernatural events.

Aslan also occasionally over stretches himself in his attempts to deny miracles. For instance, he suggests that its unlikely that the Prophet (s) was illiterate, because as a merchant, he supposedly had to be able to read and write. Clearly Aslan has not spent much time with illiterate people- and is unable to recognize just how much these people can do without reading and writing. (illiterate people today are health workers treating pneumonia and malaria using complex medical regimens, and performing internationally recognized reseach, including recording results, about endangered species).

However, I must admit that I greatly appreciated Aslan's candor about the religious personalities involved. Sunni Islamic scholarship presents early Islamic historical figures (such as the first 4 Caliphs) and the early Muslim community in general as incredible, nearly error free, almost absolutely perfect, human beings- almost super-beings. I was always struck at the incongruity of such idealized descriptions and the fact that within a few decades after the death of the Prophet (s), the early Islamic community entered a massive civil war from which one could argue Islam never recovered. I wondered, how could such a supposedly perfect community made with such supposedly perfect people get into such a serious mess so quickly? Reading Aslan's descriptions (which included Sunni, Shii, and western sources) of the personalities involved was very helpful in this regard: they weren't perfect people, but were deeply religious, well meaning people who, yes, had their share of faults, misunderstandings, and disagreements (about Islam and a lot of other things) which built up over the years, and in the chaotic transition after the Prophet's death, exploded into civil war.

Aslan is unable to hide his obvious disdain of the Ulama (Islamic Scholars who have codified Islamic Law, or Shariah). He paints them entirely in a negative light, as a power hungry, control mad group who has stifled all flexibility from the religion. While this view undoubtedly has a good deal truth to it (I am extremely sympathetic), it must also be admitted that the Scholars did a great deal of work to preserve the religion, and its history, without which we may not even have the religion today, and certainly would know far less about the events surrounding its birth and rise. Aslan is equality negative about the Ayatollah Khomeni, who he feels promised democracy but in reality bamboozled the Iranian people into accepting a theocracy (in reality, a dictatorship under his rule) through his powerful persona. Aslan's views on Khomeni are understandable given the fact that he lived his early life in Iran, experienced the hope that the Iranian people felt during the revolution, only to have to flee the country his family.

On the other hand, Aslan is quite positive about Sufism, the spiritual branch of Islam, defending all its variations, despite admitting that at least some Sufi beliefs don't square very well with the basic Islamic creed, "No God but God." Aslan correctly states that Sufism is quite complex, and is not generalizable, but occasionally tries anyway, with a view of defending Sufism against the barrage of negative criticism it has received for its unorthodox views. However, this approach leads to occasional contradictions: for example Aslan states that all Sufis follow Islamic acts of worship such as 5 daily prayers, but then also says that some Sufis believe acts of religious worship are only important for the masses, and others believe it is a shell that can be cast off once deeper layers of spirituality are realized.

Aslan's biases are finally represented in his vision of Islam's future. He clearly believes in Islamic pluralism, and believes that it can best be represented by a democracy. Furthermore, he believes that when God's law and the popular will contradict, the popular will should win out. The limits of Islamic pluralism is hotly debated today in the Muslim world, but for me, the claim, "No God but God" is the key to Islam, along with the belief in Muhammad (s) Prophethood. These two aspects should be the backbone of anyone calling themselves a Muslim.

The issue of popular sovereignty over divine law (properly understood and contextualized) is considerably more complex. I ultimately agree with Aslan, one cannot enforce on a community any law, including a from God, over a people who do not believe in it. However, Aslan leaves it there, as it that is the end of the story. I would argue that every effort should be made to make the community see the wisdom of divine laws, emphasizing positive consequences (improved justice, equality, social harmony, etc) and pointing out negatives (chaotic society, broken down families, etc) both in this world and in the afterlife.

As other reviewers mention, Aslan is a good writer. His writing is clear and he is able to explain complex concepts deftly. I actually found his 'idealized' sections (the 'myths') often even better written and more powerful than this supposedly objective analysis that follows: his 'myths,' whether of the Prophet (s), the companions, the Caliphs, or Sufi legends are dramatic and pulsating with life. After reading them, it was a bit of a let down (and at times, even irritating) to be told, 'well this is what REALLY happened' and getting down to the analysis. Aslan should try his hand at fiction!

Being an agnostic, I look at this book as an analysis of Islam from a present and future aspect. I did not realize that there were so many sects within Islam. Most members of this faith that I have known or been acquainted with have been normal members of society,mainly of Pakistani origin. I am of Jewish origin and some Islamists, mainly from Egypt, would not talk to me. This is against the teachings of Mohammed, a fact unknown by most Mohammedans. The politicalization of this faith is also contrary to his teachings.Since there is so little organization within the relgious factions, I can now understand how the faith can be manipulated by a few. It is almost like the takeover of Germany in the 1930's by Adolph Hitler and his group. I used to think it was sloganism when people said that the faith was hijacked by radical politicians. Now It seems to me, after reading this text, to be a reality .I think it should be a must reading especially by our politicians,but also people of all faiths, especially Islamists!

Not in our grandchildren's lifetimes will they see anything remotely resembling enlightened Islam. The author's major problem is that he grew up in America, and understanably, sees the Islamic world and history from that Christianized perspective. The Koran is written in an old fashioned language and script that is not easily accessible to the modern arabic reader. Couple that with the fact that illiteracy rates are very high in many Islamic-dominant countries, except his home country of Iran, and they are at the mercy of the mullahs who preach and teach whatever they interpret as "holy writ". With over 240 admonitions to control, convert, or kill the infidel, and only one or two mentions of Love in a Christian sense, it's no wonder the Islamic fundamentalist have won the reformation battle. Game over. Anyone who espouses a modernistic reform agenda will be be rooted out, and struck down. It's dangerous wishful thinking otherwise.

Difficult read, but I really enjoyed it. Gave good insight into the Muslim people. Had it signed by Reza Aslan when he spoke at my local library. Great guy and very charasmatic speaker. Be sure to see him if he's ever in your area. He also made a great appearance on The Daily Show with John Stewart.

The reformation of Christianity was a violent argument that engulfed Europe in war for more than a century - even continuing to almost the present in Northern Ireland. Thus, one should not expect Islam to resolve its differences quickly - so says Reza Aslan. On the other hand, with the exception of Northern Ireland, Christianity put this behind it long, long ago.

Because of the variability of the Arabic language, wildly different translations of the Quran exist. This problem has been compounded by additions and changes imposed by those with high religious status among his successors. Thus, what Aslan contends were the original views of Muhammed have been substantially "updated" - most particularly regarding how women are treated.

I was very disappointed by the book's failure to shed light on the intense antagonism now shared between Sunnis and Shias in Iraq.

This is a very good and needed book for our times of fear and tensions.
Aslan writes " What is taking place now in the Muslim world is an internal conflict between Muslims, not an external battle between Islam and the West. The West is merely a bystander--an unwary yet complicit casualty of a rivalry that is raging in Islam over who will write the next chapter in its story." (p. 248) This book with its insightful review of Islamic history supports the above statement and sheds light on the
tragedy of America's invasion of Iraq and the resulting quagmire.

Appropriately critcal of terrorist violence, Aslan, in a relatively compact
book shows us the complex contours of Islam that so few understand. There is hope here.. but not easily achieved and requiring growth out of present
states of ignorance by all concerned citizens of the world community.

As a muslim woman who had been conflicted between my personal beliefs and the current interpretation of Islam, this book was a breath of fresh air. It reaffirmed how Islam is a religion of compassion, respect & tolerance and how the original vision of Islam was the creation of a true civil society. The message of this book is much needed. For what this book gave me personally, I cannot thank Reza Aslan enough.

Many people are arguing over this book with the assumption that it's outright defending Islam. While I would say that yes, Aslan makes many statements in the defense of Islam, I would not say that that is the sole purpose of the book. I found "No god but God" to be a relatively neutral overview of the history and development of the Islamic faith and religion. Aslan is critical where criticism is necessary, and defensive on points that are unjustly under fire, but for the most part he leaves the interpretation of the morality of the various historical characters and events to the readers, and does not spoon-feed his opinion to the reader. I encourage you to read this book and see the history of Islam (of course don't just rely on one book, but you should read many more to get as many perspectives as possible), and then to make your own judgments, so long as they are informed.

Reza Aslan does write well in the sense that he writes things with an excellent syntax, he possesses a large vocabulary and he tries to portray things in a more or less historical way. Still, we find quite some inconsistencies and adornments that do not belong in a writing that is about historical facts. Now people would employ harsher standards for books on the Bible. It should be about time that the Quran is analyzed in such a way.
Just some comments:
In page 54 of the paper back edition, he writes:
"The Jews regularly employed the Arabs to transport their dates to nearby markets... while the Arabs maintained a high esteem for the learning, craftmanship and heritage of their Jewish neighbors, who were, in the words of the Arab chronicler al-Waqidi, a people of high lineage and of properties, whereas we were but an Arab tribe who did not possess any palm trees nor vineyards, being people of only sheep and camels". Then, on page 96 he says:
"But the most glaring problem with this theory is not how little credit it gives to Mohamed but how much credit it gives to to Medina's Jews. As mentioned, the Jewish clans in Medica, themselves Arab converts - were barely distinguishable from their pagan counterparts either culturally or, for that matter, religiously"
And Yathrib (first quote) IS Medina (Al-Medina is basically The City).
Now about Mohamed and "peace":
"Mohamed deeply loved Uthman, but never once entrusted him with leading a raid or an army" (124)
About the massacre of the Qurayza: "In recent years, contemporary scholars of Islam, arguing that Muhamad's actions cannot be judged according to our modern standards, have striven to place the execution of the Qurayza in its historical context". Ok, but then: is Mohamed inspired by God? Does God change according to the historical context? Or do we start explaining things from a non-religious perspective? And why was Christianity's beginning so different and so peaceful? (another matter what happened after Christianity became a state religion, 300 years after its appearance).
Reza is defending the wars and fights and raids Mohamed carried out saying it was about the time, that in China Buddhists fought Taoist rules, Vishnu people fought Shiva kingdoms, Christians fought others, etc.
He concludes "thus, every religion was a 'religion of the sword'".
In another part he mentions Mohamed was a good fighter. How can a religion of peace be founded by someone who expanded the religion by fighting?
Many things like the belief that Mohamed flew to Jerusalem in one night and went to heaven with his horse and others about the virgins are not treated. Even if they did not appear in the Quran itself, the book should have treated these issues, which are having quite some consequences in the minds of many people nowadays.
An important difference between Islam and other religions is that who fought in the name of those other religions were not the FOUNDERS of those religions, but people who came centuries after.
There was a sanctioned use of violence in the first books of the Old Testament, but one sees a deep evolution until one arrives at the books of the Prophets and then the big change with the New Testament.
Buddha or his nearest people were not fighting, nor was Jesus and his people (several centuries had to pass). And Jesus and Buddha lived before Mohamed, not after United Nations' declaration on Human Rights.
A historian writes after all of this, out of the blue, "With the exception of the Quran, every single source of Islamic law was the result of human, not divine effort". And yet he did mentioned the possibilities that there were many versions of the Quran before one of the Kalifas decided to burn all but one.
Something else: page 65
"The most shocking aspects of Mohamed's marriages is not his ten years of polygamy in Yathrib, but his twenty-five years of monogamy in Mecca, something practically unheard of at the time". False. Not the majority of men could be polygamous, as simple demographics can show and besides, Mohamed owned his wealth, in spite of his "sales abilities" to the fact that he was taken over and given the resources by Khadija.
I think it is some start that a Muslim writes sometimes critically about Islam in times when it is so dangerous for a believer of that religion to express doubts or criticism publicly.
Still, we need to wait some time until we can get a scientific evaluation of the Quran and Mohamed and the initial times of Islam from a Muslim, the way we had Bible criticisms several centuries ago.
All in all, the book contains some interesting facts and hypotheses about Islam. I am waiting for a more scientifically based book, though

Reza Aslan does write well in the sense that he writes things with an excellent syntax, he possesses a large vocabulary and he tries to portray things in a more or less historical way. Still, we find quite some inconsistencies and adornments that do not belong in a writing that is about historical facts. Now people would employ harsher standards for books on the Bible. It should be about time that the Quran is analyzed in such a way.
Just some comments:
In page 54 of the paper back edition, he writes:
"The Jews regularly employed the Arabs to transport their dates to nearby markets... while the Arabs maintained a high esteem for the learning, craftmanship and heritage of their Jewish neighbors, who were, in the words of the Arab chronicler al-Waqidi, a people of high lineage and of properties, whereas we were but an Arab tribe who did not possess any palm trees nor vineyards, being people of only sheep and camels". Then, on page 96 he says:
"But the most glaring problem with this theory is not how little credit it gives to Mohamed but how much credit it gives to to Medina's Jews. As mentioned, the Jewish clans in Medica, themselves Arab converts - were barely distinguishable from their pagan counterparts either culturally or, for that matter, religiously"
And Yathrib (first quote) IS Medina (Al-Medina is basically The City).
Now about Mohamed and "peace":
"Mohamed deeply loved Uthman, but never once entrusted him with leading a raid or an army" (124)
About the massacre of the Qurayza: "In recent years, contemporary scholars of Islam, arguing that Muhamad's actions cannot be judged according to our modern standards, have striven to place the execution of the Qurayza in its historical context". Ok, but then: is Mohamed inspired by God? Does God change according to the historical context? Or do we start explaining things from a non-religious perspective? And why was Christianity's beginning so different and so peaceful? (another matter what happened after Christianity became a state religion, 300 years after its appearance).
Reza is defending the wars and fights and raids Mohamed carried out saying it was about the time, that in China Buddhists fought Taoist rules, Vishnu people fought Shiva kingdoms, Christians fought others, etc.
He concludes "thus, every religion was a 'religion of the sword'".
In another part he mentions Mohamed was a good fighter. How can a religion of peace be founded by someone who expanded the religion by fighting?
Many things like the belief that Mohamed flew to Jerusalem in one night and went to heaven with his horse and others about the virgins are not treated. Even if they did not appear in the Quran itself, the book should have treated these issues, which are having quite some consequences in the minds of many people nowadays.
An important difference between Islam and other religions is that who fought in the name of those other religions were not the FOUNDERS of those religions, but people who came centuries after.
There was a sanctioned use of violence in the first books of the Old Testament, but one sees a deep evolution until one arrives at the books of the Prophets and then the big change with the New Testament.
Buddha or his nearest people were not fighting, nor was Jesus and his people (several centuries had to pass). And Jesus and Buddha lived before Mohamed, not after United Nations' declaration on Human Rights.
A historian writes after all of this, out of the blue, "With the exception of the Quran, every single source of Islamic law was the result of human, not divine effort". And yet he did mentioned the possibilities that there were many versions of the Quran before one of the Kalifas decided to burn all but one.
Something else: page 65
"The most shocking aspects of Mohamed's marriages is not his ten years of polygamy in Yathrib, but his twenty-five years of monogamy in Mecca, something practically unheard of at the time". False. Not the majority of men could be polygamous, as simple demographics can show and besides, Mohamed owned his wealth, in spite of his "sales abilities" to the fact that he was taken over and given the resources by Khadija.
I think it is some start that a Muslim writes sometimes critically about Islam in times when it is so dangerous for a believer of that religion to express doubts or criticism publicly.
Still, we need to wait some time until we can get a scientific evaluation of the Quran and Mohamed and the initial times of Islam from a Muslim, the way we had Bible criticisms several centuries ago.
All in all, the book contains some interesting facts and hypotheses about Islam. I am waiting for a more scientifically based book, though

Reza Aslan's "No God but God" provides an excellent, well written and easy reading overview on the origin of Islam and Islamic thought. The book guides the reader somewhat effortlessly through a subject that many westerners are both wary of, and ill-informed. Aslan's commentary is both learned and practical. He has accomplished what many scholars have failed to do; this is a must read. In addition, "No God but God" puts a human face on Islam and particularly Mohammed. Aslan also provides a human face for the Caliphs and the schism. It is money well spent.

If you have but one book to read, or one book to pull together varied pieces, Reza Aslan provides a well written story of the origins and evolution of Islam with a somewhat less thorough discussion of the future of Islam. There is a slight Shi'a bias that is not enough to deter use as the first or best summary single volume discussion of Islam. It is deeper and more thorough than Karen Armstrong's more historical survey; far more up to date than the old Hamilton Gibb classic, more solid than the "Idiot's" approach - and certainly better than any one book by Bernard Lewis. It requires - and rewards - a bit more of the reader.

The "Prologue" illustrates the incredible ignorance and bias of Christian leaders in the US and could have added similar atrocious examples among leading politicians. It is no wonder that the general public is mislead and confused. It is no wonder that stupid policy mistakes have been made with Muslims.

The chapter on Ulema and Shari'a better place media myths in perspective. Each topical chapter provides similar benefits.

The final chapter "Slouching Towards Medina" provides a quick summary of background to contemporary thought consistent with the author's argument that a Reformation is needed and in progress. Aslan points out that this is an entirely different context without any organized "church". He does not speculate on how different the circumstances because the Christian Reformation was not complicated by massive foreign interference (cultural, economic, and political). The main focus of Islam is Islam; the West and Western interests are secondary and most important when getting in the way - hence Osama's attack on the "far enemy". (Islam's aggressive "Jihadis" are mostly a fantasy of the West justifying paranoia and counterattack with miniscule support among Muslims.)

This is an excellent book for the serious reader as a first book on Islam. It is perhaps equally usefully to review and rethink one's understanding for those with some knowledge of Islam to sort out their own positions.

Normally I would call a work of academics arguing that a religious text (something claiming to be absolute) should be viewed in socio-cultural terms, essentially relativized, as particularly repugnant sophistry; but maybe people like Aslan are needed to calm religious sentiments in Muhammadan communities, much like the workers of the European Enlightenment helped to do here in the more civilized world.

I'm torn between not saying much more about this book and raging against its pretentious glee at claiming to have infinite interpretations (of its patron religious text, and, presumably, itself), but conveniently never a basis to dismiss any of it. I mean, I'm confident "No god but God" (a phrase from the quran) means to say, "You can't say a damn thing that will ever change our minds."

I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in Islam's birth and development, or the life of Muhammad (peace be unto him). Aslan writes wonderfully, binding his facts into the text perfectly - it does not feel too 'scholarly', it is not hard to follow or gain insight on.

However, if you are looking more for something that explains Islamic beliefs and practices, this may not be for you. Great for the ones interested in history, though.

I wish I could make every Christian I know read this book.

I wish I could make every Christian I know read this book.

Positives:

1. Fresh perspective
2. can't put it down kind of story-telling
3. very clear message
4. no factual errors that I could find
5. excellent justapositions of historical relations/events/ideas

Negative:

1. can't think of any.

I highly recommend this book to Muslims as well as non-Muslims. Reza Aslan provided a very fresh and unbias explanation of Islam. The book not only reviews the history of Islam but the present problems with Islam as well as Muslims. It has been written very eloquently and well researched. One can learn a great deal from this book as well as actually enjoy reading it.

I read this book on the strength of other reviews. At 336 pages, it is an extremely terse and somewhat superficial summary of the Muslim religion. I disagree with the reviewer who claimed that Aslan writes so well. He's not bad; but he's not great, either. He makes me wonder if the term "religious scholar" isn't an oxymoron.

As I read I couldn't help thinking of the hippies who became "Jesus Freaks" in the 1960's: Aslan uses infuriatingly vague language to describe transcendent experiences. He strikes me as yet another in a long line of pseudo-intellectuals (like Neale Donald Walsch or Deepak Chopra) who try to reconcile ancient mysticism with contemporary reality.