A Critical Review of Don Gibson's Views Regarding the Geographical Location of the Cave of Hira

Abstract

This paper offers a critical examination of Dan Gibson’s controversial theory concerning the geographical location of the Cave of Hira. Gibson, a Canadian orientalist, argues that the original sacred city of Islam was Petra rather than Mecca, thereby attempting to relocate significant Islamic sites including the Cave of Hira to Petra. His claims rely heavily on selective readings of early Islamic texts and perceived geographical inconsistencies within traditional narratives. Central to his argument is the assertion that the Cave of Hira must face the Kaaba and contain pagan carvings, which he interprets as evidence of its Petra-based location. This study demonstrates that such interpretations stem from a misreading of Seerah literature and Hadith traditions, reflecting both linguistic inaccuracies and a lack of contextual understanding. Moreover, the identification of a cave in Petra as the Cave of Hira is shown to be logically and theologically problematic, particularly given its association with idolatrous imagery elements fundamentally opposed to the prophetic mission of Muhammad (peace be upon him). By analyzing Gibson’s methodology and contrasting it with established Islamic scholarship, the paper argues that his theory is speculative, devoid of credible archaeological or textual support, and ultimately misrepresents Islamic sources. The review concludes that Gibson’s approach undermines academic reliability and fails to provide a convincing alternative to the traditional understanding of Mecca as the historical and spiritual center of Islam.