Thomas Aquinas and 13th-Century Spain’s Fatwa Against Muhammad

Thomas Aquinas accused Muhammad of pandering to carnal desires

Thomas Aquinas wrote in chapter six of the first book of his Summa contra gentiles that Muhammad seduced people with promises of pleasure and tailored his message to those desires. This 13th-century accusation serves as a theological authority in current debates against Sarracin, yet the original text is far more nuanced than commonly cited.

What Chapter 6 of the Summa contra gentiles actually says

Cited as Book 1, Chapter 6, Article 4, the passage levels several charges. First, Aquinas argues Muhammad offered **promises of carnal pleasure** driven by concupiscence. Second, his teachings accommodated these promises, indulging in pleasure, leading to his obedience by carnal men.

The second part addresses methodology. Aquino claims Muhammad offered only proofs accessible to common wisdom, unlike previous prophets, and perverted Old and New Testament testimonies while forbidding their reading. His closing statement, "whoever puts any faith in his words believes foolishly," is the most circulated.

The Christian canon and translations: the counter-blow

Critics argue the New Testament is a composed text fixed at the **Council of Nicaea** after discarding unfavorable gospels, with no input from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Another issue is source accessibility: Mass was in Latin, and the Old Testament was not readily available in Spanish until past **1900**. Similarly, varying Quran translations cause confusion, proving that without Arabic, one relies on third parties.

Ramon Llull, the Balearic who preached in Tunisia

**Ramon Llull**, born in the Balearic Islands in 1230, spent his life preaching Christianity to Jovenlandeses and writing against what he saw as sensual religious promises, dying stoned in Tunisia. This anecdote places the controversy in the 13th century, not an invented present.

From the 13th century to geopolitics: what seeps into the debate

The jump to the present is inevitable and where reasoning frays. Some link jihadist violence to Western sponsorship, specifically **NATO**, without evidence. Others claim **90% of those killed by ISIS and Al Qaeda are Jovenlandeses**, a statistic that would debunk a clean clash of civilizations.

It is crucial to separate what a 13th-century theologian said about a 7th-century prophet from current politics. The medieval text functions primarily as rhetorical ammunition.

Why is Thomas Aquino still cited against Sarracin?

Because it lends authority. Invoking a saint and Doctor of the Church presents an opinion as intellectual conclusion without new argument. Aquino wrote in a context of theological dispute and expansion, and his claims about Muhammad do not pass the filter he demanded of others: accessible and verifiable proofs.

With the medieval text circulating as short quotes, its use as a slogan rather than an argument is expected. Reading the full first book before sharing remains unlikely.