Was Muhammad Really Illiterate? A Critical Examination of the Traditional Islamic Claim

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

One of the most widely asserted claims in Islamic theology is that Prophet Muhammad was illiterate, and that this illiteracy serves as proof of the divine origin of the Qur’an. This paper critically evaluates the historical, linguistic, and hadith-based evidence surrounding this claim. It also questions the theological implications of asserting Muhammad’s illiteracy as a miracle, demonstrating that both the premise and the conclusion are flawed. Further analysis is provided on the interpretation of the Arabic term ummiyy (ٱلْأُمِّيّ) and its contextual meaning, including a re-examination of hadiths that suggest Muhammad was capable of reading and writing.

1. Introduction

Muslims commonly argue that the illiteracy (ummiyy) of Prophet Muhammad is miraculous, positing that the literary excellence of the Qur’an could not have originated from an unlettered man. This reasoning, however, presumes two unverified claims: first, that Muhammad was indeed illiterate in the strict sense of being unable to read or write; and second, that the Qur’an was revealed in a purely oral form without any textual interaction by Muhammad. This paper questions both claims.

2. The Traditional Understanding of 'Ummiyy' (ٱلْأُمِّيّ)

In Islamic theology, Surah 7:157 refers to Muhammad as al-nabiyy al-ummiyy (ٱلنَّبِيُّ ٱلْأُمِّيُّ), usually translated as "the unlettered Prophet." However, the Arabic term ummiyy does not unambiguously mean “illiterate.” According to Edward William Lane in An Arabic-English Lexicon (1863, p. 92), ummiyy can also mean "gentile", especially when contrasted with Jewish or scriptural communities. This is supported by Surah 62:2, which describes Muhammad as being sent “to the ummiyyīn,” often interpreted as “to the gentiles.”

“It is He who has sent among the unlettered [ummiyyīn] a Messenger from themselves…” (Qur’an 62:2, Sahih International).

Thus, a textual-linguistic analysis suggests that ummiyy may refer to Muhammad’s lack of scriptural background (non-Jewish), rather than a lack of literacy. The conflation of ummiyy with “illiterate” lacks strong philological support.

3. Hadith Evidence Questioning Illiteracy

3.1 Treaty of Hudaybiyyah (Sahih al-Bukhari 2699)

One of the strongest arguments against Muhammad’s illiteracy arises during the drafting of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah. The hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari (2699) records that the Prophet instructed Ali to strike out the phrase *“Messenger of Allah”* after the Quraysh objected. When Ali refused, Muhammad is said to have taken the treaty and made the change himself:

“So Allah's Messenger took the document and wrote…”
(Sahih al-Bukhari, 2699)

This moment contradicts the belief that Muhammad could neither read nor write. If he personally modified a treaty document, that indicates at least rudimentary literacy.

3.2 Final Illness and Request for Writing Tools (Sahih al-Bukhari 114; Sahih Muslim 1637a)

During Muhammad’s final illness, he is reported to have requested writing materials to leave a directive for his followers:

“Bring me a pen and paper so I may write for you a statement after which you will not go astray.”
(Sahih al-Bukhari, 114; Sahih Muslim, 1637a)

Although the Prophet’s request was interrupted and unfulfilled, the hadith strongly suggests his intent to write personally, undermining the assumption that he was incapable of writing.

4. Theological Implications and Logical Fallacy

Muslim apologists often argue that the Qur'an's existence as a literary work authored by an illiterate man is evidence of divine origin. However, this reasoning is circular and self-defeating:

First, it presupposes illiteracy as fact.
Second, it assumes that human literacy or illiteracy limits divine inspiration.
Third, it ignores the Qur'an’s posthumous compilation by literate scribes like Zayd ibn Thabit and others under Caliphs Abu Bakr and Uthman.

If Muhammad merely received and orally transmitted divine revelation, then his literacy status becomes irrelevant to the Qur’an’s composition. Furthermore, reliance on a claim of illiteracy to validate divine origin ignores better theological criteria, such as truthfulness, historical accuracy, and moral coherence.

5. Conclusion

The claim that Muhammad was illiterate is not conclusively supported by linguistic analysis or early Islamic sources. The use of ummiyy in the Qur’an likely refers to non-Jewish background rather than illiteracy. Additionally, key hadiths suggest Muhammad could read and write. Therefore, Muhammad’s supposed illiteracy should not be considered evidence for the divine origin of the Qur’an.

References

Lane, Edward William. An Arabic-English Lexicon. London: Williams & Norgate, 1863.
The Qur’an. Surah 7:157; 62:2. Translations: Sahih International.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 2699.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 114.
Sahih Muslim, Hadith No. 1637a.
Watt, W. Montgomery. Muhammad at Mecca. Oxford University Press, 1953.
Guillaume, Alfred. The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah. Oxford University Press, 1955.

Author Bio
Dr. Maxwell Shimba is the founder and director of the Shimba Theological Institute. His academic interests include Islamic apologetics, comparative theology, and historical-critical analysis of religious texts.

Thursday, July 24, 2025