Later this month the BBC is showing a three-part documentary about the life of Muhammad. I'm going to a special screening of it and a Q&A this morning in central London.

It's a television first, claims the BBC Press Office. OK they would say that wouldn't they but I think it might be the first time in decades - if not ever - that a British network has screened a programme, let alone a series, about Muhammad. According to the blurb it charts the "extraordinary story of a man who, in little more than 20 years, changed the world forever". The series as a whole raises questions about some of the more contested areas of Islam such as women, religious tolerance and conflict.

Were the series not interesting enough - even critics of Islam and religion generally are sure to find something in it - the backdrop to it is also fascinating. I've been asking BBC executives for years when they planned to show such a series - first asking its director general Mark Thompson, then its head of religion Aaqil Ahmed (more about him later) and then most recently BBC One controller Danny Cohen. After years of nagging, lo! It has come to pass.

Predictably the series, even the concept, has managed to offend before transmission. My colleague Saeed Kamali Deghan has already written about the Iranians being up in arms over it - I fully expect there will be more criticism in the coming weeks, for example secularists complaining about the licence fee funding religious propaganda.

Before I head off, here's a bit more about the programme itself. Three episodes, an hour each, on BBC 2. The presenter is Rageh Omaar. So far, so safe. I'm not a huge fan, having met and interviewed him while I was a reporter at the Manchester Evening News and being underwhelmed by the Scud Stud. But he's a familiar face, an experienced television broadcaster and, crucially, he's Muslim so he can reach parts that infidels can't. Some of the filming takes place in the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina, where non-Muslims are forbidden are going.

There are more piquant elements to the series, however. The BBC says: "In line with Islamic tradition it does not depict any images of the face of Muhammad, or feature any dramatic reconstructions of Muhammad's life." It also remains to be seen - and I don't know whether this query will be addressed either on screen or in the Q&A - whether the documentary deals with Aisha, who may have been as young as nine where her marriage to Muhammad was consummated. Mark Thompson, speaking back in 2008 at Westminster Cathedral, said Islam and Christianity were treated differently on television.

Then there is the BBC's head of religion, Aaqil Ahmed, who commissioned the series. There was a minor storm when it transpired he was a frontrunner for the job. At the time the Daily Telegraph religion editor - George Pitcher, who now works for the archbishop of Canterbury - wrote several articles about why Ahmed should not get the job. Here is the second one he wrote on the subject and here is the third on the same subject. Would such a three-part series have come about under a different, non-Muslim, BBC Head of Religion? Perhaps not. Interestingly, when he was still at Channel 4, Ahmed told me that he would not make a programme for Channel 4 that he could imagine on the BBC. He also told me he was working on a programme about the life of Muhammad. So he has done the latter - just not for Channel 4. I can't tell you about the former.

When I come back this afternoon, I'll have a mini-review, instant reactions from the other guests and a report of the Q&A with Rageh and Aaqil. I'll also be running a scorecard. So one point for a call to prayer or a mosque shot, three for a niqabi, five for a jihadi video and 10 for a camel. See you later.

So I've returned from the screening - and there were no Muslims present. Apart from Aaqil Ahmed, BBC head of religion, presenter Rageh Omaar and me. The Muslim opinion formers were invited last night (Monday) and I've put calls in to find out what they thought. Aaqil said there was a round of applause at the end of the first episode. I've also asked the BBC to send me a trailer so I can post it here so you can get an idea of the tone of the documentary.

To the programme itself: it was interesting and courted controversy without necessarily grabbing it by the balls. Before the programme started Aaqil said there were no depictions of Muhammad because he wasn't a "fan of drama docs, fashion-wise they're out of fashion".

Even though we didn't see the prophet we did see shots of praying (tick!), veiled women (tick!), jihadi references such as the planes flying into the twin towers and the decimated remains of the 30 bus from the 7/7 attacks and veiled women praying (double tick!). There were also shots of camels. My score card is full.

The opening episode deals with the circumstances and society that Muhammad was born into. It charts his childhood and early years - being orphaned, being taken in by his uncle - and the narrative is interspersed, interrupted I'd say, with shots of Rageh praying, Rageh brooding, Rageh climbing over rocks in a manful and foreign correspondent-like way. He makes the point - fairly emphatically - that Muslims believe there is a difference between the message and the messenger and that is why there is "no shrine, no plaque to mark the place of his birth". Muslims are "following the messenger not worshipping him". In spite of this delineation the viewer is reminded over and over again how important Muhammad is to the lives of Muslims everywhere, including Rageh, enthusiastic assertions that were lost on him during the question and answer session that followed.

The documentary, as I said earlier, does not shy away from contention but doesn't immerse itself in the details either. I'm going to paraphrase some examples for you. According to Islamic tradition, Muhammad could neither read nor write so the Qur'an is the subject of divine revelation rather than Muhammad's imagination. The programme also addresses the issue of the satanic verses, not just the apocalyptic fall-out from the Rushdie book but the incident where a supposedly divine revelation - acknowledging pagan gods - was later withdrawn because it was designed as a test. In both cases the veracity of the Qur'an - as a divine revelation - and the status of Muhammad as a prophet, if not the prophet, comes under scrutiny.

As an opening episode it's fairly heavy going if you're new to the finer points of Islamic theology or Islam full stop. But it's well filmed, has plenty of access to the relevant sites and has a diverse line-up of talking heads - Karen Armstrong, Tariq Ramadan, Robert Spencer, Michael Nazir-Ali and Tom Holland.

I'm going to come back later with a round up of what was said in the question and answer session. I might also have had some reaction from the Muslim opinion formers and a BBC trailer too.

Just had my first reaction from a Muslim opinion former, who wished to remain anonymous.

It's very well done. It is difficult to approach it as a Muslim. You have to engage with it as a Muslim and see the purpose of the BBC making it for a general audience. How might non-Muslims better understand his life and ministry? The cinematography is fantastic, there are lots of scenes that are atmospheric and poignant. They've made good use of historical archives and there's a who's who of academics. They've tried to interweave the controversies that have developed around Muhammad's life. I did enjoy it. They have gone to great lengths to do this as comprehensively as possible and not shy away from the things that people fixate on. I think they've done a great job.

Let's crack on with the Q&A. The first question was about the sensitivities of making a programme about Muhammad. Director David Batty had a comprehensive answer:

There weren't any reference points. Our reference points had to be how we would treat other religions or faiths. We had to look at all the big issues, all the controversies and deal with them like we do with others.

Here's Aaqil on whether he had any anxieties about making broadcasting history (in the west at least):

"From my point of view you always have anxieties. I don't mean to be flippant. I don't have any specific anxieties because it's about Muhammad."

And Rageh Omaar:

There's a lot of ambition. We were very keen to do it. It's never been done before. We're setting the bench mark. Things will follow on from this. I would describe it as an issue of responsibility.

Aaqil again:

Everybody wants to be the first. There's a responsibility of doing something for the first time. There's also a sense of everything being measured against this. This will be the reference point. That's also quite an exciting thing. To be doing something where you're doing something for the first time.

I still don't have the trailer from the BBC and I've only located two more opinion formers - deputy secretary general of the MCB Shuja Shafi and banker Shabir Randeree. I've asked to speak to them so fingers crossed and inshallah.

The BBC has told me the programme will be trailed from tonight (Tuesday) on television and the programme page will be live tomorrow (Wednesday) and it will feature clips. In the meantime here's what Shabir Randeree (one of the opinion formers from Monday night's preview) thought of the first episode.

I thought it was absolutely fantastic. It's fairly and constructively put together. You can follow the chronology the Prophet, peace be upon him, from his birth to the death of his first wife. I think it will come as a surprise to many non-Muslims, the historical fact finding part of it. But for Muslims there aren't going to be many surprises. It's not an educational piece. It's a piece of TV. From an information point of view it did what it set out to do. Hopefully the wider audience will think the same. The subject has always been so controversial. They walked the line very well.

And the final stretch from the Q&A. I asked Aaqil why this programme had taken so long to make - or rather why it hadn't been made sooner. He said:

As a community, people have only been here since the 60s. It takes a generation for people to be in positions of authority. The audience's needs are very different to what they have been. These things do take a long time to come off. We're talking about negotiating with different countries to get access to do it properly. All the conversations have been based on trust. All sides of the conversation have huge respect for Rageh Omaar. We're in a position where lots of people can deliver this. Anybody can commission this, it's whether they have the ability to deliver this. You don't have to be a Muslim to deliver this. I want to have a programme that appeals to as wide an audience as possible. There's a gap in the market. A story about the origins of Islam is a slam dunk. If it's not been done before there's an audience that will come to it. There's a huge thirst for knowledge.

Wow. They obviously feel as if they have the hand of history on their shoulders.

It feels like an age ago but I mentioned Rageh talking about how important/influential/all-encompassing Muhammad was to Muslims. So he was asked about his faith and whether his background undermined his impartiality. He replied:

I don't think my views or practices have got anything to do with it. I'm presenting it as a reporter. I don't think it discredits me. This is about the prophet, not Rageh Omaar's take on the prophet.

Aaqil chipped in and said Rageh's knowledge of the subject had to be set up but denied the tone was not "reverential" before adding: "What we're not doing is a critique of whether he's a prophet or not. That's very hard to prove."

The transmission date is July 11 and the programme goes out on BBC at 2100.

Thanks for your patience (and comments) and don't forget to tune in to the programme on July 11. Sorry I couldn't bring you the trailer or clips but you should be able to catch them pretty soon.