Medieval Christian polemic dismissed even Muhammad’s good acts as tricks

Evidence

This point relates to doctrine; it is extremely rare for even apparently good actions to be admitted of Muhammad’s life. The individualistic Liber Nicholay is an exception, and speaks of his ‘rejoicing with those who rejoiced, weeping with those who wept, giving all he possessed to the poor, devoting his time by day and night to prayer, and fasting daily’; but this again was all a trick to gain acceptance as a prophet. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 2235

Categorization

• XREF: Corroborates the vault’s existing claim pattern about how the ‘Racial Muslim’ is constructed — each seemingly positive datum is re-read through the master trope of deception, mirroring how Aziz shows secular suspicion consumes every benign visible practice.
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: the totalizing logic that makes every good act itself evidence of fraud — does this show up identically in the modern counter-terrorism archive?
• DEEPTHINKING: There is something dense here about the unfalsifiability of deception-as-interpretive-key — no evidence can count against the accusation, because all evidence is folded into the accusation.