Monday, 28 April 2014

Poor Muhammad, Or Was He?

By Mumin Salih         

Mohammed is portrayed, by Muslims as well as many non Muslims, as a poor man who dedicated his life to deliver Allah’s message to mankind. He is usually associated with a simplistic life style that lacks the lavishness enjoyed by the rich and famous of his time. In the minds of Muslims, Mohammed’s image is that of a determined messenger of Allah who was not deterred by the hardship and the persecution he suffered at the hands of the Meccan Arabs (1). Such representation of Mohammed as savour, who had no material ambitions or earthy desires and achieved no personal gains, fits well in the image of the ‘perfect hero’, which Muslims aim to paint for him. Mohammed’s early childhood as an orphan, who lost his father before he was born and lost his mother at the age six, provided the Muslims with a convenient readymade foundation on which they built their desired image of their hero.
Such image of Mohammed’s life style is one of Islam’s strange ironies because it is believed despite the evidence to the contrary. Such claim about a simplistic Mohammed is a clever mental illusion that distracts the mind from seeing the obvious and works well even on people who are critical of Mohammed. The secret of the success of this mental trick lies in the different perception of luxury in the seventh century Arabia. People have different tastes and priorities in life; what is considered to have a high value by some people may have no value at all to others. The Arabs’ in general were not keen on appearances and the other manifestations of high class or royalty. Managing wealth depends on personal taste, culture and the available resources, all of which were poorly developed in Arabia compared to the other nations of the time like the Romans and the Persians.
The Arabs have always been loyal to their tradition, which explains why Islam is shaped to agree with those traditions. Even today, departing from the local traditions is considered a serious social offence that most modern Arabs try to avoid. In the seventh century Arabia, it was considered a social duty for the chief of the tribe to open his house to all, a tradition that is still alive in many Arab societies today. Such a tradition was considered as a sign of generosity and an indication of distinction and social prominence. In the seventh century, it was traditionally unacceptable for the wealthy Arabs, who were normally eminent figures in their tribes, to be segregated from the rest of their societies by guards or palace walls. Arabic literature is rich in examples that emphasise that tradition. I am not sure if it is still the case, but it was customary for the rulers in the Gulf States to offer coffee in their lounges, called diwan, to ordinary people, who seize the opportunity to hand their complaints, or requests for help, directly to the rulers. In addition to the cultural reason, there were other reasons for the lack of palaces, and other manifestations of luxury, in Arabia. The Arabs, in the seventh century, did not have the technology or the resources to build spectacular palaces on the scale known in Persia or Syria. A simple tent was a practical and simple answer to the hot desert climate. Those who visit the Gulf States may be surprised to see that the wealthy Arabs still use tents which they erect next to their palaces. Gaddafi’s tent is a living reminder, not just of the Libyan leader’s eccentricity, but also of that old desert tradition.
It is true that Mohammed did not own spectacular palaces, but neither did any other wealthy leader in Arabia. In the absence of accurate indicators of capital such as bank accounts, Mohammed’s wealth has to be gauged using the suitable measures of the time. In other words, we have to look at his assets in the form of properties, as well as his other possessions. This article is not designed to provide an estimate of Mohammed’s wealth, but it sheds some light on only some of his assets and refutes the claims that he was poor or had a simplistic life style. As usual, our sources are the authentic Islamic history sources; it is either that the Islamic history is completely wrong (and Islam is a big lie) or that Mohammed was a corrupt ‘millionaire’ (and also Islam is a big lie).

Mohammed in Mecca- a ‘millionaire’ aged 25
We learn from sira (Mohammed’s biography) that Mohammed was trained to be a merchant by his uncle Abu Talib, with whom he travelled to Syria. Mecca was the most affluent city and the undisputed cultural and trade centre of Arabia. As a young man, Mohammed had his own business as a merchant and did so well that he could afford to offer financial help to Abu Talib by raising one of his children, Ali, in his own house. At an early age, Mohammed was selected by Khadija, the wealthiest woman in Mecca, to manage her business. Obviously she paid him well and treated him well as evidenced by the fact that she offered him to marry her when he was still twenty five years of age.
With such wealth at his disposal, Mohammed became one of the most prosperous men in Arabia when he was only twenty five years of age. Khadija died a few years later leaving all her possessions to him. These are all historical facts about Mohammed’s life that were never disputed by Muslims before. It is clear that throughout all his adult life in Mecca, Mohammed was a rich man.

Mohammed in Yathrib- a leader
Mohammed emigrated to Yathrib (present day Medina) in 622 AD and established his Islamic state. Inevitably, the relocation to Yathrib was associated with extra spending and a period of instability, but Mohammed had a long time to plan and prepare for that historic move. However, Mohammed did feel the financial crunch in Yathrib not so much for him personally but more for his group of immigrants, known as ‘almuhajiroon’. Unlike Mecca, the economy of Yathrib was not based on trade but on farming and simple crafts. As a leader of a united group of men, Mohammed had the means, and the opportunity, to establish some form of business to secure a reasonable income, but he opted to earn his money the easy way- piracy, which he called jihad. After scoring initial swift gains by raiding trading caravans and the neighbouring tribes, the taste of easy money flavoured by his victims’ blood was too good to Mohammed to give up, and too addictive that he eventually made it a lifelong career.

In general, a man is considered poor when he is unable to live without financial help from the others. A person who can afford to own a reasonable house and provides the means of reasonable living standards to his family is generally considered to be comfortable. Rich people are those who own more assets than they need. By any standard, a man who owns many houses with servants and slaves must be a wealthy man.
We do not know exactly the grand total of Mohammed’s wives but we know that at one stage he had nine of them. We also know that each of Mohammed’s wives had her own house, maids and slaves. Marriages were costly social activities especially when the bridegroom happened to be the leader of the community. When Mohammed successfully formulated the divine decree to marry Zaynab, he celebrated for a week; hundreds of goats were slaughtered to provide lavish meals for the residents of Medina. Throwing a party for a week, for the entire city, can hardly be called a simplistic life style; only the super rich can afford such extravagance. Mohammed could afford throwing many of such parties; he actually loved such lavish generosity that he made it sunna to his followers (2). He once told Abdul Rahman Ibn Auf: “make invitations, even if you cook only one goat”. In Mohammed’s ‘simplistic’ life style, a party with only one cooked goat was a small party. Getting married has always been an expensive social event; Mohammed afforded marriage not once but many times. Marrying multiple wives was a sign wealth in Arabia, which is hardly surprising, and still so in our time.

After establishing his Islamic state in Yathrib, Mohammed became the only man on earth to share Allah his wealth. He cleverly released a verse (3) stating that one fifth of all war booties were to be assigned to Allah and his messenger; in real terms to Mohammed alone. That verse alone secured an enormous and regular income and effectively safeguarded Mohammed’s wealth throughout his life.

Some of Mohammed’s Assets (4):
Wives: here are the names of one dozen of them, but he probably had many more. Kadija, Sawda, Aysha, Hafsa, Zainab Al Hilalya, Aum Salma, Zainab Bintu Jahsh, Juwayryia, Safiya, Um Habiba, Maria, Maymuna.
Houses: Mohammed gave each of his wives a house, totally independent from the others. Each wife had her own maids and slaves, all paid for by ‘poor’ Mohammed.
Slaves: Mohammed preferred to sell his slaves, but he kept some of them including Maria and Rayhana. Other slaves included: Abu Rafi, Thawba, Abu Kabsha, Salih, Rabah, Yassar, Anasa, Tahman, Keysan, Marwan.
Servants/ personal assistants: Mohammed had a dozen of servants and personal assistants, each assigned to do a specific job. The following are the names of some them:
Anas Ibn Malik: a personal assistant for general purposes.
Ibn Massoud: looked after Mohammed’s sewaks ( used to clean the teeth) and shoes.
Ukba: looked after Mohammed’s mules
Abu Zar, Bilal and many others.
Personal guards: Mohammed employed a number of bodyguards; the following are the names of some of them: Saad Ibn Maaz, Ibn Salma, Al Zubair and Abbad Ibn Bashr.
Cattle: owning a horse in the past was like owning a top of the range luxury car. Mohammed owned not one but dozens of horses, mules and donkeys and had specialist people employed to look after them. He also owned herds of camels and goats.
Lands: Mohammed owned the entire land of Khayber, where the tribe of Bani Al Nadeer used to live. The Jewish tribe was defeated; many of its men killed and women enslaved, the survivals were deported to outside Arabia. The tribe’s processions and the entire land were assigned to Mohammed (5). Mohammed also owned a large land outside Medina in a region called Fadak.

Conclusion: Mohammed became a wealthy man from a young age. His eccentric and complex personality was associated with matching eccentric desires on which he spent his wealth. He was not a refined man and never developed the taste for a refined life style. His mind was totally occupied with myths, religions and the supernatural. His dream and fascination was to be seen by his followers as a man with absolute divine authority, an obsession that he achieved once he seized power. Armed with his divine claims, Mohammed sought total obedience from his followers. The Muslims’ submission to Mohammed was voluntary but was driven by a state of fear, not from Mohammed but from Allah! The paradox is that although Mohammed was an authoritarian tyrant, he was neither feared nor hated by his followers- because it is all from Allah!
Armed with his false divine claims, Mohammed successfully made it part of the faith that Muslims must love him more than they loved themselves. No king had ever managed to achieve such state of conformity from his subjects. Mohammed’s sick ego could only be satisfied by emphasising to his followers that he was the best man to walk on the earth. Through his false divine authority, Mohammed could ‘own’ any woman he desired, even if she was married. Mohammed’s sick desires exist only in sick minds, but any of those desires is well beyond the reach of the richest and most powerful men on earth. Mohammed’s sick ego was better satisfied by watching his followers eating like him, drinking like him and dressing like him, which they still do today. Good Muslims can only like what Mohammed liked and hate what Mohammed hated.


1. The truth is that the Meccans demonstrated exemplary tolerance to Mohammed, see ‘Islamic Jihad, a legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery’ pages 18-26 by M A Khan.
2. Mohammed told Abdulrahman Ibn Auf, one of close sahaba: اولم ولو بشاة, meaning it is good to make a dinner invitation, even if he only cooks one goat. Reported by both Bukhari and Muslim.
3. Q. 8:41: And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah and to the Messenger ...”
4. Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyyah: ‘ زاد المعاد في هدي خير العباد zad al ma-aad fi hady kairil ibad’:
5. According to hadith by Omar Ibn Al Khattab, reported by Al Tirmizi, Page/Number 1719 in the Arabic edition.



Monday, 14 April 2014

Islam enslaves women, period

It is a common fallacy spread by Muslim apologists and dhimmi mouthpieces that "Islam is a great for women." One time, I was almost physically attacked by a "cool" New Ager type who told me he was reading the Koran/Quran, followed quickly by the off-the-cuff-remark, "Islam is great for women."

The comment was so out of left field that it smacked of, "Me thinks thou doth protest too much." Why would he need to make such a declaration, unless he knew that there was a debate as to whether or not Islam was "great for women?" He obviously knew many had claimed the opposite that is Islam is bad for women. At that moment - being a woman - I asserted the opposite as well, at which point he became quite angry, completely losing his holier-than-thou enlightenment. Apparently, my womanly opinion was not appreciated.

No one can tell me that "Islam is great for women," because - surprise! - I have eyes to see how women are treated in the Muslim world. And I've actually read the Koran, which is not only anti-infidel but also anti-woman, while the bulk of Islamic woman-enslavement can be found in other Muslim scriptures such as the hadiths. As one example, Koranic sura 4:34 states:

"Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and forsake them in beds apart, and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme." (The Koran with Parallel Arabic Text, tr. N.A. Dawood, 83)

Concerning the subjugation of women in Islam, Dr. Ergun Mehmet Caner states: "How is this subordinate status defined? According to hadith 3.826, Muhammad said that women are genetically and legally inferior: 'Muhammad asked some women, "Isn't the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?" The women said, "Yes." He said, "This is because of the deficiency of the woman's mind."'...

"Three times in the Hadith, Muhammad's vision of hellfire is recorded, each time including the same feature: 'Muhammad said, "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers are women."' As a result of this teaching, women are regarded as both harmful to men and a bad omen. 'Muhammad said, "Bad omen is in the women, the house and the horse...after me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women."'

"A woman, thus being a lesser creature, has fewer rights and privileges in Muslim society. In apportioning inheritance, a woman should receive half of what a man receives: 'To the male a portion equal to that of two females' (sura 4:11). In judicial proceedings, a woman's testimony is given one-half the value and credibility as that of a man
... (sura 2:282). (Caner, Ergun Mehmet and Caner, Emir Fethi, Unveiling Islam: An Insider's Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs, 134)

Islam gives men authority over women in a variety of ways - and an emancipated woman who was actually raised Muslim can attest to this fact abundantly. Just ask Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Dr. Wafa Sultan and Nonie Darwish, as but a few examples. Hirsi Ali in particular was subjected to the crudest form of classical- not "extremist" or "radical" - Islam, complete with radical genital mutilation and the nearly full veil of the chador/abaya. (Unlike the burkha and niqab, these coverings allow for the face to be shown.) These women will tell you that classical Islam is absolutely not "great" or even good for women.

Is slavery is "great" for blacks?
The Muslim apologist argument runs that women in the pre-Islamic world were actually worse off than they are within Islam! First of all, it depends on what location you are discussing: This claim may be true for the Arabian Peninsula, for example, but not in many other parts of the world. How about Polynesia, where women live quite freely by comparison? Or what about other eras, in which the Goddess ruled and women were revered in a far greater manner than at any other time in history?; Today in the democratic Western cultures women have achieved - or re-achieved - much of this status, although even here sexism remains in many areas to some extent, unfortunately.

Secondly, just because women appear to be slightly or even somewhat better off within Islam than they were in the pre-Islamic Arabian Peninsula, that alleged fact does not mean that "Islam is great for women." Slaves in 19th century America were far better off than their counterparts in Africa - does that mean that slavery is great for blacks? To those of us women, who are truly free, liberated and whole, with the wealth of life's opportunities available on the table before us, Islam represents slavery, period. And that is one reason why so many women are at the forefront of battling back the brutal, cruel and inhumane Islamic/sharia law that would reduce us to household/sex slaves and baby-making machines. The bottom line is that Islam is NOT "great for women."



Muhammad and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy (TLE)

By Ali Sina

The Physical Effects of Muhammad’s Ecstatic Experiences:

Here is how Muhammad described his mystical experiences: “The Revelation is always brought to me by an angel: sometimes it is delivered to me as the beating sound of the bell--and this is the hardest experience for me; but sometimes the angel appears to me in the shape of a human and speaks to me.” [40]
Those who saw the Prophet (pbuh) in this state relate that his condition would change. Sometimes he would stay motionless as if some terribly heavy load was pressed on him and, even in the coldest day, drops of sweat would fall from his forehead [41] At other times he would move his lips.

Ibn Sa'd says, "at the moment of inspiration, anxiety pressed upon the Prophet, and his countenance was troubled" [1]

He fell to the ground like one intoxicated or overcome by sleep; and in the coldest day his forehead would be bedewed with large drops of perspiration. Inspiration descended unexpectedly, and without any previous warning."[2]

"Then Allah's Apostle returned with that experience; and the muscles between his neck and shoulders were trembling till he came upon Khadija (his wife) and said, "Cover me!" They covered him, and when the state of fear was over" [3] and [4]

All these are symptoms of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. The following is a partial list of the Temporal Lobe Seizure Symptoms & Signs as defined in

Hallucinations or illusions such as hearing voices when no one has spoken, seeing patterns, lights, beings or objects that aren't there

- Rhythmic
muscle contraction Muscle cramps are involuntary and often painful contractions of the muscles which produce a hard, bulging muscle
Abdominal pain or discomfort. Sudden, intense emotion such as fear.
Muscle twitching (fasciculation) is the result of spontaneous local muscle contractions that are involuntary and typically only affect individual muscle groups. This twitching does not cause pain.
- Abnormal mouth behaviors
- Abnormal head movements
- Sweating
- Flushed face
- Rapid heart rate/pulse
- Changes in vision, speech, thought, awareness, personality
- Loss of memory (amnesia) regarding events around the seizure (partial complex seizure)

All the above symptoms were present in Muhammad during the moments that he was allegedly receiving revelations.
- He had visions (hallucinations) of seeing an angel or a light and of hearing voices.
- He experienced bodily spasms and excruciating abdominal pain and discomfort
- He was overwhelmed by sudden emotions of anxiety and fear
- He had twitching in his neck muscles
- He had uncontrollable lip movement
- He sweated even during cold days.
- His face flushed. His countenance was troubled.
He had rapid heart palpitation
- He had loss of memory. (There is a tradition that states Muhammad was bewitched and used to think that he had sexual relations with his wives when he actually had not. [5]

It is also interesting to note that Muhammad's hallucination was not limited to seeing the Angel Gabriel but he also claimed seeing Jinns and even in one occasion while praying in the mosque he started struggling with an imaginary person and later said "Satan came in front of me and tried to interrupt my prayer, but Allah gave me an upper hand on him and I choked him. No doubt, I thought of tying him to one of the pillars of the mosque till you get up in the morning and see him. Then I remembered the statement of Prophet Solomon, 'My Lord ! Bestow on me a kingdom such as shall not belong to any other after me.' Then Allah made him (Satan) return with his head down (humiliated)." [6]

Muhammad's belief in Satan was such that he seemed to think that not even he is immune from his whisperings. [7]

One of the embarrassing events in Muhammad's life occurred when Satan put words in his mouth.

Tabari says: “
When the messenger of God saw how his tribe turned their backs on him and was grieved to see them shunning the message he had brought to them from God, he longed in his soul that something would come to him from God which would reconcile him with his tribe. With his love for his tribe and his eagerness for their welfare it would have delighted him if some of the difficulties which they made for him could have been smoothed out, and he debated with himself and fervently desired such an outcome. Then God revealed:

"By the Star when it sets, your comrade does not err, nor is he deceived; nor does he speak out of (his own) desire..."
and when he came to the words:
Have you thought upon al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?
Satan cast on his tongue, because of his inner debates and what he desired to bring to his people, the words:
"These are the high flying cranes; verily their intercession is accepted with approval.

The Quraysh left delighted by the mention of their gods. Amity was restored and the news of that reached the followers of Muhmmad who at his behest had migrated to Abyssina and some of them returned. Muhammad realizing the consequence of this is giving up on his monopoly on God and the contradiction that it entails, claimed those verses and his Allah consoled him saying, “Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom: 22:52 [8]

In the Quran there are several mentions of Jinns. Surah 72 narrates a conversation between Jinns where they comment about the Quran, call it “a wonderful Recital” and convert to Islam. Their role is described as prying into the secrets of heaven and eavesdropping to the conversation of the exalted assembly. Which since the apparition of Muhammad, they found it filled with stern guards and flaming fires. “We used, indeed, to sit there in (hidden) stations, to (steal) a hearing;" Quran quotes one Jinn saying to others, "but any who listen now will find a flaming fire watching him in ambush. And we understand not whether ill is intended to those on earth, or whether their Lord (really) intends to guide them to right conduct".

It is not difficult to see that Muhammad suffered from Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. In fact TLE was just one of his ailments. The prophet suffered from other mental disorders and physical complications. I will speak about them in future. The real miracle is in the fact that a billion people follow a sick man for so long.

[1] Katib al Waqidi p. 37. See also Bukhari 1: 1: 2
[2] Bukhari 7, 71, 660
[3] Bukhari 6, 60, 478
[4] B. 9,78.111
[6] Bukhari 2, 22, 301
[7] 6.68, 6.116, 22.52
[8] Tabari volume 6, page 107

Background: Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) was defined in 1985 by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) as a condition characterized by recurrent unprovoked seizures originating from the medial or lateral temporal lobe. The seizures associated with TLE consist of simple partial seizures without loss of awareness (with or without aura) and complex partial seizures (ie, with loss of awareness). The individual loses awareness during a complex partial seizure because the seizure spreads to involve both temporal lobes, which causes impairment of memory.
TLE was first recognized in 1881 by John Hughlings Jackson, who described "uncinate fits" and the “dreamy state." In the 1940s, Gibbs et al introduced the term "psychomotor epilepsy." The international classification of epileptic seizures (1981) replaced the term psychomotor seizures with complex partial seizures. The ILAE classification of the epilepsies uses the term temporal lobe epilepsy and divides the etiologies into cryptogenic (presumed unidentified etiology), idiopathic (genetic), and symptomatic (cause known, eg, tumor).

Pathophysiology: Hippocampal sclerosis is the most common pathologic finding in TLE. Hippocampal sclerosis involves hippocampal cell loss in the CA1 and CA3 regions and the dentate hilus. The CA2 region is relatively spared.

For more information, see Pathophysiology in the article Seizures and Epilepsy: Overview and Classification.

In the US: Approximately 50% of patients with epilepsy have partial epilepsy. Partial epilepsy is often of temporal lobe origin. However, the true prevalence of TLE is not known, since not all cases of presumed TLE are confirmed by video-EEG and most cases are classified by clinical history and interictal EEG findings alone. The temporal lobe is the most epileptogenic region of the brain. In fact, 90% of patients with temporal interictal epileptiform abnormalities on their EEG have a history of seizures.

- Aura
- Auras occur in approximately 80% of temporal lobe seizures. They are a common feature of simple partial seizures and usually precede complex partial seizures of temporal lobe origin.
Auras may be classified by symptom type; the types comprise somatosensory, special sensory, autonomic, or psychic symptoms.
- Somatosensory and special sensory phenomena
- Olfactory and gustatory illusions and hallucinations may occur. Acharya et al found that olfactory auras are associated more commonly with temporal lobe tumors than with other causes of TLE.
- Auditory hallucinations consist of a buzzing sound, a voice or voices, or muffling of ambient sounds. This type of aura is more common with neocortical TLE than with other types of TLE.
- Patients may report distortions of shape, size, and distance of objects.
- These visual illusions are unlike the visual hallucinations associated with occipital lobe seizure in that no formed elementary visual image is noted, such as the visual image of a face that may be seen with seizures arising from the fusiform or the inferior temporal gyrus.
- Things may appear shrunken (micropsia) or larger (macropsia) than usual.
- Tilting of structures has been reported. Vertigo has been described with seizures in the posterior superior temporal gyrus.
- Psychic phenomena
- Patients may have a feeling of déjà vu or jamais vu, a sense of familiarity or unfamiliarity, respectively.
- Patients may experience depersonalization (ie, feeling of detachment from oneself) or derealization (ie, surroundings appear unreal).
- Fear or anxiety usually is associated with seizures arising from the amygdala.
- Patients may describe a sense of dissociation or autoscopy, in which they report seeing their own body from outside.
- Autonomic phenomena are characterized by changes in heart rate, piloerection, and sweating. Patients may experience an epigastric "rising" sensation or nausea.

- Following the aura, a temporal lobe complex partial seizure begins with a wide-eyed, motionless stare, dilated pupils, and behavioral arrest. Oral alimentary automatisms such as lip smacking, chewing, and swallowing may be noted. Manual automatisms or unilateral dystonic posturing of a limb also may be observed.
- Patients may continue their ongoing motor activity or react to their surroundings in a semipurposeful manner (ie, reactive automatisms). They can have repetitive stereotyped manual automatisms.
- A complex partial seizure may evolve to a secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizure.
- Patients usually experience a postictal period of confusion, which distinguishes TLE from absence seizures, which are not associated with postictal confusion. In addition, absence seizures are not associated with complex automatisms. Postictal aphasia suggests onset in the language-dominant temporal lobe.
- Most auras and automatisms last a very short period—seconds or 1-2 minutes. The postictal phase may last for a longer period (several minutes). By definition, amnesia occurs during a complex partial seizure because of bilateral hemispheric involvement.

- Approximately two thirds of patients with TLE treated surgically have hippocampal sclerosis as the pathologic substrate.

The etiologies of TLE include the following:
- Past infections, eg, herpes encephalitis or bacterial meningitis
- Hamartomas
- Gliomas
- Vascular malformations (ie, arteriovenous malformation, cavernous angioma)
- Cryptogenic: A cause is presumed but has not been identified.
- Idiopathic (genetic): This is rare. Familial TLE was described by Berkovic and colleagues, and partial epilepsy with auditory features was described by Scheffer and colleagues.
- Hippocampal sclerosis produces a clinical syndrome called mesial temporal lobe epilepsy (MTLE). MTLE begins in late childhood, then remits, but reappears in adolescence or early adulthood in a refractory form.
- Febrile seizures: The association of simple febrile seizure with TLE has been controversial. However, a subset of children with complex febrile convulsions appears to be at risk of developing TLE in later life. Complex febrile seizures are febrile seizures that last longer than 15 minutes, have focal features, or recur within 24 hours.