Anjem Choudary Move Aside!
While Anjem Choudary continues to make as much noise as possible. His ultimate objective is to see Sharia Law in U.K. Mr Choudary has not openly advocated terrorism, only large criticisms of the West and strict Islamic adherence.
What makes this rather funny is the Muslims over at MDI have disowned Mr Choudary and wonder why he gets so much media attention.
But the irony is these Muslims over at MDI agree with Choudarys ultimate belief and objective:
Taken from here:
"Our Belief
MDI takes as it sole adopted beliefs, the Islamic creed (Aqeedah), that it holds there to be no God except the one God, and Muhammed (pbuh) as His final Prophet and Messenger. MDI also believes in all the preceding prophets named in the Quran. Furthermore, the MDI holds that the Quran is a revealed communication from God and thus held to be true and accurate. The examples and sayings of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) are a universal example for us to hold onto for all times and places. Lastly, we hold that since humans have not changed in essence and nature since their beginning, the laws of Islam (shariah) are unchanging and relevant to all times and places. Thus MDI believes that Islam is intellectually sound, and a perfect and complete way of life for mankind."
Question: What is the difference between Choudary and MDI?
Well the only difference is "presentation". While Mr Choudary protests often comes across as extreme as the EDL, MDI merely advocates the same thing without all the noise and without the personality cult.
Question: How many "MDIs" are out there? "Intellectually" debating their way to Sharia?
Sam Shamoun brings to light another historical error in the Quran
The Qur'an makes several claims. It claims, the real disciples/helpers of Jesus were Muslims. It claims that these true followers of Jesus will be superior and prevail until the day of resurrection. It also claims Jesus was not killed, nor was he crucified and therefore he wasn't resurrected. The Qur'an also teaches dominion over creation belongs to God alone and no other creature. Of course a serious problem is that the Quran falsifies itself due to the fact that rather it is the Pauline followers that supposedly contradicted the real message and original followers of Jesus that has prevailed to this date.
But in all irony it is now known that it is not merely the Christian tradition that asserts the early Christian beliefs were Christian orientated, it is the very best critical New Testament Scholarship that Muslims themselves appeal to that assert the earliest followers of Jesus believed in the death, burial, resurrection and universal lordship of Jesus. It is the very best of critical scholarship and historical analysis that leads even the most critical scholars to believe the earliest followers of Jesus believed in Jesus as some kind exalted divine ruler, completely opposing the Muslim assertion that Jesus was merely a slave and prophet of God whom had no divine status in which he no shared rulership with God as exalted divine Lord.
I highly recommend these three articles(here, here, here) where my friend Sam Shamoun has documented the scholarly perspective on what the earliest followers of Jesus believed. Now the Scholars might not outright describe the earliest believers as "Trinitarians", but nor would they use the word "Muslim". What is apparent is that the closet position seemed to be being described is that of Arianism or a type of Biunitarianism.
In any case I highly agree with Shamouns conclussion, Paul Williams must become agnostic in order to be consistent and therefore give up writing for MDI and join my blog here at AnsweringAbraham in exposing these sorts of inconsistencies.
Here is Shamoun's argument in his own concluding words:
Islamic theology itself agrees that God alone reigns over all creation and that no creature is allowed to share in God’s unique rule over all things:
Indeed, the truth deny they who say, "Behold, God is the Christ, son of Mary." Say: "And who could have prevailed with God in any way had it been His will to destroy the Christ, son of Mary, and his mother, and everyone who is on earth - all of them? For, God's is the dominion over the heavens and the earth and all that is between them; He creates what He wills: and God has the power to will anything!" And [both] the Jews and the Christians say, "We are God's children, and His beloved ones." Say: "Why, then, does He cause you to suffer for your sins? Nay, you are but human beings of His creating. He forgives whom He wills, and He causes to suffer whom He wills: for God's is the dominion over the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and with Him is all journeys' end." S. 5:17-18 Muhammad Asad
And say, 'Praise belongs to God, who has not taken to Himself a son, and has not had a partner in His kingdom, nor had a patron against (such) abasement.' And magnify Him greatly! S. 17:111 Y. Ali
This is known as tauhid al-rububiyyah.
Moreover, to say that Allah has taken a creature to be his partner in ruling over all things, or in running the affairs of creation, is to commit the unpardonable sin of association, otherwise known as shirk:
Moreover, to say that Allah has taken a creature to be his partner in ruling over all things, or in running the affairs of creation, is to commit the unpardonable sin of association, otherwise known as shirk:
VERILY, God does not forgive the ascribing of divinity to aught beside Him, although He forgives any lesser sin unto whomever He wills: for he who ascribes divinity to aught beside God has indeed contrived an awesome sin. S. 4:48 Asad – cf. 4:16; 2:22
Williams’ Dilemma
Williams is now faced with a major problem since the Quran asserts that Jesus’ disciples were all Muslims:
Then when 'Iesa (Jesus) came to know of their disbelief, he said: "Who will be my helpers in Allah's Cause?" Al-Hawariun (the disciples) said: "We are the helpers of Allah; we believe in Allah, and bear witness that we are Muslims (i.e. we submit to Allah)." S. 3:52 Hilali-Khan
And when I (Allah) put in the hearts of Al-Hawarieen (the disciples) [of 'Iesa (Jesus)] to believe in Me and My Messenger, they said: "We believe. And bear witness that we are Muslims." S. 5:111 Hilali-Khan
If this were true then that means that none of the disciples would have ever gone around proclaiming that Christ ascended into heaven after his resurrection to rule the entire creation from God’s very own throne since this would be a clear violation of tauhid al-rububiyyah (assuming, of course, that Jesus is nothing more than a mere creature).
However, according to the very scholars which Williams is constantly parroting around such as Dunn, all the evidence conclusively proves that this is exactly what Jesus’ disciples preached!
According to scholars like Dunn, the first Christians believed that Jesus died on the cross to make atonement for sins, that he had been raised from the dead, that he ascended to heaven to sit on God’s own throne in order to reign over all creation as Lord, and that they would all call on his name in their prayers and worship. None of these beliefs agree with the teachings of the Quran or the traditions of Muhammad.
According to scholars like Dunn, the first Christians believed that Jesus died on the cross to make atonement for sins, that he had been raised from the dead, that he ascended to heaven to sit on God’s own throne in order to reign over all creation as Lord, and that they would all call on his name in their prayers and worship. None of these beliefs agree with the teachings of the Quran or the traditions of Muhammad.
How the Apostle Paul managed to trump Allah by overcoming his will!
But it gets worse for Williams. Williams seems to not realize that by saying that Paul really invented Christianity he is pretty much condemning the Quran which says that Allah promised Jesus that his followers would be victorious and become dominant from the moment of Christ’s ascension into heaven until the day of resurrection:
Lo! God said: "O Jesus! Verily, I shall cause thee to die, and shall exalt thee unto Me, and cleanse thee of [the presence of] those who are bent on denying the truth; and I shall place those who follow thee [far] ABOVE those who are bent on denying the truth, UNTO THE DAY OF RESURRECTION. In the end, unto Me you all must return, and I shall judge between you with regard to all on which you were wont to differ.” S. 3:55 Asad
Here is how another version renders this text:
Behold! God said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee SUPERIOR to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.” Yusuf Ali
The Islamic scripture claims that Allah kept his promise since he made sure that the followers of Christ prevailed over the disbelievers:
O YOU who have attained to faith! Be helpers [in the cause of God - even as Jesus, the son of Mary, said unto the white-garbed ones, "Who will be my helpers in God's cause?" - whereupon the white-garbed [disciples] replied, "We shall be [thy] helpers [in the cause] of God!" And so [it happened that] some of the children of Israel came to believe [in the apostleship of Jesus], whereas others denied the truth. But [now] We have given strength against their foes unto those who have [truly] attained to faith: AND THEY HAVE BECOME THE ONES THAT SHALL PREVAIL. S. 61:14 Asad
This either means that Allah lied since he had no intention in keeping his promise to Jesus, which is why he allowed Paul to come in and sabotage Christ’s message by having “Pauline Christianity” prevail over the teachings of the disciples. Or Allah is impotent since a finite creature was able to thwart Allah’s will for Jesus and his followers!
Or Williams must accept the fact that Paul was a true Apostle whom God used to spread Jesus’ message all over the then known world. In fact, this was the position of some of Islam’s earliest and greatest scholars and historians:
“Yazid b. Abu Habib al-Misri told me that he found a document in which was a memorandum (T. the names) of those the apostle sent to the countries and kings of the Arabs and non-Arabs and what he said to his companions when he sent them. I sent it to Muhammad b. Shihab al-Zuhri (T. with a trusty countryman of his) and he recognized it. It contained the statement that the apostle went out to his companions and said: ‘God has sent me (Muhammad) to all men, so take a message from me, God have mercy on you. Do not hang back from me as the disciples hung back from Jesus son of Mary. They asked how they hung back and he said, ‘He called them to a task similar to that which I have called you. Those who had to go a short journey were pleased and accepted. Those who had a long journey before them were displeased and refused to go, and Jesus complained of them to God. (T. From that very night) every one of them was able to speak the language of the people to whom he was sent.' (T. Jesus said, ‘This is a thing that God has determined that you should do, so go.’
“Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple AND PAUL WITH HIM, (PAUL BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS AND WAS NOT A DISCIPLE) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage and Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas" (The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth impression 1995], p. 653)
This same tradition is cited by al-Qurtubi in his commentary on Q. 61:14:
It was said that THIS VERSE was revealed about the apostles of Jesus, may peace and blessing be upon him. Ibn Ishaq stated that of the apostles and disciples that Jesus sent (to preach) there were Peter AND PAUL who went to Rome; Andrew and Matthew who went to the land of the cannibals; Thomas who went to Babel in the eastern lands; Philip who went to Africa… Allah supported them (the apostles) with evidence so that they prevailed (thahirin) meaning they became the party with the upper hand. Just as it is said, “An object appeared on the wall” meaning it is clearly visible (alu-wat) on the wall. Allah, who is glorified and exalted, knows the truth better and to Him is the return and retreat. (Translated by Dimitrius; bold and capital emphasis ours)
It is also quoted by al-Tabari with approval:
“Among the apostles, and the followers who came after them were the Apostle Peter and Paul who was a follower and not an apostle; they went to Rome. Andrew and Matthew were sent to the country whose people are man-eaters, a land of blacks, we think; Thomas was sent to Babylonia in the east, Philip to Qayrawan (and) Carthage, that is, North Africa. John went to Ephesus, the city of the youths of the cave, and James to Jerusalem, that is, Aelia. Bartholomew was sent to Arabia, namely, the Hijaz; Simeon to the land of the Berbers in Africa. Judas was not then an apostle, so his place was taken by Ariobus. He filled in for Judas Iscariot after the latter had perpetrated his deed.” (The History of Al-Tabari: The Ancient Kingdoms, translated by Moshe Perlmann [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1987], Volume IV, p. 123; bold emphasis ours)
The translator explains what al-Tabari meant that Paul was not an apostle:
317. In Islamic terms the messengers or apostles pave the new path. Their work is continued by the tabi'un, the followers, members of the next generations, who lead the Faithful. (Ibid)
Al-Tabari even lists Paul as one of those martyred for the faith!
“Abu Ja'far says: They assert that after Tiberius, Palestine and other parts of Syria were ruled by Gaius, son of Tiberius, for four years. He was succeeded by another son, Claudius, for fourteen years, following which Nero ruled for fourteen years. He slew Peter and crucified Paul head down. For four months Botlaius [Vittelius] ruled thereafter. Then Vespasian, father of Titus whom he sent to Jerusalem, ruled for ten years. Three years after his rise to power, forty years after the ascension of Jesus, Vespasian sent Titus to Jerusalem. Titus destroyed it and slew numerous Israelites in his wrath over the fate of Christ…” (Ibid, p. 126)
Yet even this position creates problems for Williams. Paul (as well as the first disciples of Christ) taught that Jesus is the risen Lord who died for our sins and rose from the dead to reign over all creation from God’s own throne, which means that Muhammad is a false prophet since he denied all these truths.
Hence, all of the evidence points in one direction: Islam is a false religion, the Islamic deity is a false god, and Muhammad was one of the antichrists which the first Christians warned would come into the world to mislead people away from the truth of Christ:
“Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.” 1 John 2:22-23
In light of the foregoing, the only options left for Williams is to either accept the conclusions of his own scholars, and therefore accept Jesus as his risen Lord and Savior, or become an agnostic. Remaining a Muslim is NOT an option since this would only expose Williams’ inconsistencies and dishonesty.
After all, to continue believing Islam would not only show that Williams doesn’t even believe what his own scholars have to say concerning early Christian beliefs and practices, it would also demonstrate that he doesn’t bother to apply the same criticisms and objections to the Quran or the traditions attributed to Muhammad.
Qur'an burning protests rage as death toll reaches 23 in Afghanistan
Twelve people killed Friday as anti-US sentiment spreads for fourth straight day in wake of holy book burning at Nato base
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/24/afghanistan-quran-burning-protests-23-dead
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/24/afghanistan-quran-burning-protests-23-dead
Judge Mark Martin Scolds Victim Who Insulted Islam
Recently an Atheist in Pennsylvania was assaulted by an immigrant Muslim for wearing a zombie Mohammed Halloween outfit.
I found the audio of this court herring where the Atheist has charged the Muslim with assault.. I cannot believe my f**** ears. Disgusting
http://atheists.org/blog/2012/02/22/muslim-attacks-atheist-muslim-judge-dismisses-case-blames-victim
I found the audio of this court herring where the Atheist has charged the Muslim with assault.. I cannot believe my f**** ears. Disgusting
http://atheists.org/blog/2012/02/22/muslim-attacks-atheist-muslim-judge-dismisses-case-blames-victim
Burn't Quran Has Now Lead To Two Dead
Sick disgusting behavior resulting from the unintentional disposal of several Qurans by Americans in Afghanistan has lead to weeks of violent protests and now two american solider deaths and four injuries. What is the worse part of this is that President Obama has apologized for these burning and now Afghan and American forces are co-operating to "investigate" this incident. The Afghan regime is also supporting the "trial" of these Quran burners. The people are also demanding the burners be put on "Trial".
Is Islam A Religion Of Peace?
Re-examining the historical context of Quran Chapter 9:29 "Is Islam a religion of peace?"
This is one of the most controversial passages of the Quran in Muslim/Non-Muslim Post Modern Dialogue:
Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
This is one of the most controversial passages of the Quran in Muslim/Non-Muslim Post Modern Dialogue:
Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Most modern Muslims thankfully only believe that the Quran instructs defensive warfare. Perhaps they might extend this to a type of defensive 'offensive' warfare. At the very least 'offensive' warfare might only be permitted in serious situations, like that of genocide and oppression but never for the sake of spreading Islam by the sword or forcing people to pay the Jizya as a source of income.
While you have to hope and wish most Muslims always think like this, for the purposes of studying the life of Mohammed and most closest accurate teachings of the Quran we must put most-modern western interpretations aside and proceed with some more serious investigation.
To briefly summarize the issue. Muslim expositors all tend to agree the reason for the revelation(arabic: sabab ul nazul) for this verse was the charge to fight with the Christian Romans in Tabuk (Northern Arabia).[1]
Of course you have to ask yourself the important question. Why is God ordering the Muslims to fight the Christians? Is it for money? Is it for retaliation of some kind? Is it to spread Islam? Is is to end oppression and tyranny? Is it to defend borders?
The first and most powerful source of Quranic exegesis/explanation(arabic: tafseer) in Islam is the Quran explaining the Quran[2]. Now because the command to "Fight The People of The Book" is found no where else in the Quran it would be futile to go to other passages addressing the different circumstances of other groups like Meccans and possibly specific tribes of Jews (e.g. 2:256 and 109:1-6) and then apply those circumstances to this passage.
Therefore because the Quran is the best explanation of itself and this is the only mention of this charge to fight the people of the book we must appeal to the immediate context of this chapter and then the immediate verses.
A small summary of the chapter before verse 29 is as follows:
- Muslims ought to have faith that Allah will not allow them to fall into poverty.
- God calms the Muslims nerves thinking of future battle by reminding them of previous battle victories
- God reminds the Muslims to not valueworldly materialism over belief in God his Apostle and fighting for God
- The sacred mosque belongs to true believers, pagans should no longer be able to enter this sacred temple The Muslims are to place faith over family bonds
- Muslims should not be afraid to fight those who had oppressed them
- Muslims are to keep the treaties bound on them until they are consummated in which then they are allowed to kill or accept repentance and the willingness to listen to the Quran.
After summarizing the previous passages it is now important to quote the immediately context:
Well it shifts into a theological criticism. Jews and Christians both associate partners with God, an unthinkable sin! These partners are said to come in the form of Uziah, Jesus, Priests and Rabbis in which they are all placed as lords over Allah.
Therefore it is clear the People of the Book have the very same uncleanliness that is attributed to the Polytheists. Now if the permission and command to kill, fight or accept repentance from Polytheists was given earlier in the chapter, then surely the Muslims are also commanded to fight the People of the Book who want to extinguish the light of God (Islam) and to whom God has cursed, must be accepted. The fact that God allows them to pay Jizya and still exist under Islamic rule despite the unthinkable polytheism is surely a mercy.
There are two other factors to mention. We clearly have the command to proclaim the true religion over all other religions, it is innately superior and polytheism is innately deranged and cursed, a severe sin. Of course the superiority in context is externally made manifest through the submission of the other religious adherents and internally through the inferiority of their beliefs. Finally there is a financial criticism rather than spending money in the way of God, these people of the book have misused their money and the real buried treasure they are storing up comes in the form of the punishments in the fires of hell.
Of course the most interesting fact to recognize here is that the chapter itself provides the very reasons the Muslims are commanded to fight the people of the book until they submit and pay Jizyah. This means any explanation contradicting or conflicting with the direct explanation provided by the Quran must be rejected. The Quran is the highest and best explanation after all.
Nevertheless some Muslims in their haste to defend Islam have appealed to various commentaries in order to justify Quran Chapter 9:29 as some kind of retaliation and retribution and defense of borders as opposed to the typical offensive jihad explanation. The most interesting facts about these commentaries are as follows:
Firstly it is necessary to read these commentaries for yourself. Secondly you should read my previous response to these commentaries. And thirdly you should read some basic history here first and then here to put things in chronological perspective.
Are you finished? Lets resume.
Here is the general pattern:
O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will God enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for God is All-knowing, All-wise. Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of God, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One God: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him). Fain would they extinguish God's light with their mouths, but God will not allow but that His light should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).It is He Who hath sent His Apostle with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).O ye who believe! there are indeed many among the priests and anchorites, who in Falsehood devour the substance of men and hinder (them) from the way of God. And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of God: announce unto them a most grievous penalty - On the Day when heat will be produced out of that (wealth) in the fire of Hell, and with it will be branded their foreheads, their flanks, and their backs, their flanks, and their backs.- "This is the (treasure) which ye buried for yourselves: taste ye, then, the (treasures) ye buried!" Yusuf Ali 9:28-36It is made painfully clear that pagan polytheists have been forbidden to enter the Sacred Mosque due to their own uncleanliness. Their uncleanliness can be described in two ways:
- There beliefs are unclean (being adherents of polytheism)
- Their actions are unclean.(having oppressed the Muslims).
The Muslims knowing that if polytheists were no longer allowed to enter the Sacred Mosque (and pay tribute to their false gods) begin to fear poverty but God responds by granting them a new source of enrichment through Jizya (the annual tax given by non-Muslims living under Islamic state). This is confirmed by a Muslim historian:
… Then He said (v. 28): ‘The polytheists are nothing but unclean, so let them not approach the sacred mosque after this year of theirs, and if you fear poverty’ that was because the people said ‘the markets will be cut off from us, trade will be destroyed, and we shall lose the good things we used to enjoy,’ and God said, ‘If you fear poverty God will enrich you from His bounty,’ i.e. in some other way, ‘if He will. He is knowing, wise. Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day and forbid not that which God and His apostle have forbidden and follow not the religion of truth from among those who have been given the scripture until they pay the poll tax out of hand being humbled,’ i.e. as a compensation for what you fear to lose by the closing of the markets. God gave them compensation for what He cut off from them in the former polytheism by what He gave them by way of poll tax from the people of the scripture. (The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Karachi Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth Impression 1995], p. 620; bold emphasis ours)The two Jalals commentators also say:
O you who believe, the idolaters are indeed unclean, [they are] filth, on account of their inner vileness, so do not let them come near the Sacred Mosque, that is, let them not enter the Sanctuary, after this year of theirs, year 9 of the Hijra. If you fear impoverishment, poverty, as a result of the cessation of their commerce with you, God will surely enrich you from His bounty, if He will: and He indeed enriched them through conquests and [the imposition of] the jizya. God is Knowing, Wise. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn; source)In fact, jizya proved to be a very lucrative means of support just as the second caliph realized:
Narrated Juwairiya bin Qudama At-Tamimi:We said to 'Umar bin Al-Khattab, "O Chief of the believers! Advise us." He said, "I advise you to fulfill Allah's covenant (made with the Dhimmis) as it is the covenant of your Prophet and the source of the livelihood of your dependents (i.e. the taxes from the Dhimmis.)" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 388)However apart from needing a new source of revenue how else do these verses justify the command to fight and retrieve financial tribute from the people of the book?
Well it shifts into a theological criticism. Jews and Christians both associate partners with God, an unthinkable sin! These partners are said to come in the form of Uziah, Jesus, Priests and Rabbis in which they are all placed as lords over Allah.
Therefore it is clear the People of the Book have the very same uncleanliness that is attributed to the Polytheists. Now if the permission and command to kill, fight or accept repentance from Polytheists was given earlier in the chapter, then surely the Muslims are also commanded to fight the People of the Book who want to extinguish the light of God (Islam) and to whom God has cursed, must be accepted. The fact that God allows them to pay Jizya and still exist under Islamic rule despite the unthinkable polytheism is surely a mercy.
There are two other factors to mention. We clearly have the command to proclaim the true religion over all other religions, it is innately superior and polytheism is innately deranged and cursed, a severe sin. Of course the superiority in context is externally made manifest through the submission of the other religious adherents and internally through the inferiority of their beliefs. Finally there is a financial criticism rather than spending money in the way of God, these people of the book have misused their money and the real buried treasure they are storing up comes in the form of the punishments in the fires of hell.
Of course the most interesting fact to recognize here is that the chapter itself provides the very reasons the Muslims are commanded to fight the people of the book until they submit and pay Jizyah. This means any explanation contradicting or conflicting with the direct explanation provided by the Quran must be rejected. The Quran is the highest and best explanation after all.
Nevertheless some Muslims in their haste to defend Islam have appealed to various commentaries in order to justify Quran Chapter 9:29 as some kind of retaliation and retribution and defense of borders as opposed to the typical offensive jihad explanation. The most interesting facts about these commentaries are as follows:
- The historical background given by these commentaries is only found in Muslim sources and no other sources outside of Arab history record this
- The specific details of these background stories are often contradictory
- The stories are not recorded in the most authentic report(hadith) collections Bukhari and Muslim, making them dubious even by Muslim standards. What is confirmed by Bukhari and Muslim is that the battle happened, the specific details of many of the commentaries is however absent and unwarranted from these authentic collections.
Firstly it is necessary to read these commentaries for yourself. Secondly you should read my previous response to these commentaries. And thirdly you should read some basic history here first and then here to put things in chronological perspective.
Are you finished? Lets resume.
Here is the general pattern:
- Mohammed sends a letter to various heads of states including the Christian Ghassan king
- Ghassan tribe member(s) Assassinate Mohammed's Men/Messenger
- Mohammed sends troops for battle of Mu'tah
- Neither side wins
- Mohammed later assembles his biggest army ever and returns to Northern Arabia in order to 'take on' these very forces and defend his new empire
It is the western Muslim assertion of course that it was the Christians themselves who instigated the battle of Mu'tah and Tabuk. Here are the commentaries they cite to support this claim:
The second event that contributed towards making Islam a formidable power was the Campaign of Tabuk, which was necessitated by the provocative activities of the Christians living within or near the boundaries of the Roman Empire to the north of Arabia. Accordingly, the Holy Prophet, with an army of thirty thousand marched boldly towards the Roman Empire but the Romans evaded the encounter. The result was that the power of the Holy Prophet and Islam increased manifold and deputations from all corners of Arabia began to wait upon him on his return from Tabuk in order to offer their allegiance to Islam and obedience to him. The Holy Quran has described this triumph in Surah AN-NASR: "When the succour of Allah came and victory was attained and you saw people entering the fold of Islam in large numbers... Campaign to Tabuk
The Campaign to Tabuk was the result of conflict with the Roman Empire, that had started even before the conquest of Makkah. One of the missions sent after the Treaty of Hudaibiyah to different parts of Arabia visited the clans which lived in the northern areas adjacent to Syria. The majority of these people were Christians, who were under the influence of the Roman Empire. Contrary to all the principles of the commonly accepted international law, they killed fifteen members of the delegation near a place known as Zat-u-Talah (or Zat-i-Itlah). Only Ka'ab bin Umair Ghifari, the head of the delegation, succeeded in escaping and reporting the sad incident. Besides this, Shurahbll bin Amr, the Christian governor of Busra, who was directly under the Roman Caesar, had also put to death Haritli bin Umair, the ambassador of the Holy Prophet, who had been sent to him on a similar minion.
These events convinced the Holy Prophet that a strong action should be taken in order to make the territory adjacent to the Roman Empire safe and secure for the Muslims. Accordingly, in the month of Jamadi-ul-Ula A. H. 8, he sent an army of three thousand towards the Syrian border. When this army reached near Ma'an, the Muslims learnt that Shurahbil was marching with an army of one hundred thousand to fight-with them and that the Caesar, who himself was at Hims, had sent another army consisting of one hundred thousand soldiers under his brother Theodore. But in spite of such fearful news, the brave small band of the Muslims marched on fearlessly and encountered the big army of Shurahbil at M'utah. And the result of the encounter in which the Muslims were fighting against fearful odds (the ratio of the two armies was 1:33), as very favorable, for the enemy utterly failed to defeat them. This proved very helpful for the propagation of Islam. As a result, those Arabs who were living in a state of semi. independence in Syria and near Syria and the clans of Najd near Iraq, who were under the influence of the Iranian Empire, turned towards Islam and embraced it in thousands. For example, the people of Bani Sulaim (whose chief was Abbas bin Mirdas Sulaimi), Ashja'a, Ghatafan, Zubyan, Fazarah, etc., came into the fold of Islam at the same time. Above all, Farvah bin 'Amral Juzami, who was the commander of the Arab armies of the Roman Empire, embraced Islam during that time, and underwent the trial of his Faith in a way that filled the whole territory with wonder. When the Caesar came to know that Farvah had embraced Islam, he ordered that he should be arrested and brought to his court.Then the Caesar said to him, "You will have to choose one of the two things. Either give up your Islam and win your liberty and your former rank, or remain a Muslim and face death." He calmly chose Islam and sacrificed his life in the way of the Truth.And of course:
The underlying Reasons
The Byzantine power, which was considered the greatest military force on earth at that time, showed an unjustifiable opposition towards Muslims. As we have already mentioned, their opposition started at killing the ambassador of the Messenger of All⨠[pbuh], Al-Harith bin ?Umair Al-Azdi, by Sharhabeel bin ?Amr Al-Ghassani. The ambassador was then carrying a message from the Prophet [pbuh] to the ruler of Busra. We have also stated that the Prophet consequently dispatched a brigade under the command of Zaid bin Haritha, who had a fierce fight against the Byzantines at Mu'tah. Although Muslim forces could not have revenge on those haughty overproud tyrants, the confrontation itself had a great impression on the Arabs, all over Arabia.
Caesar ? who could neither ignore the great benefit that Mu'tah Battle had brought to Muslims, nor could he disregard the Arab tribes' expectations of independence, and their hopes of getting free from his influence and reign, nor he could ignore their alliance to the Muslims ? realizing all that, Caesar was aware of the progressive danger threatening his borders, especially Ash-Sham-fronts which were neighbouring Arab lands. So he concluded that demolition of the Muslims power had grown an urgent necessity. This decision of his should, in his opinion, be achieved before the Muslims become too powerful to conquer, and raise troubles and unrest in the adjacent Arab territories.
To meet these exigencies, Caesar mustered a huge army of the Byzantines and pro-Roman Ghassanide tribes to launch a decisive bloody battle against the Muslims.Now I had already mentioned that this battle appears to be absent from Byzantine records and that it seems highly fanciful and non-historical to think a 'stalemate' occurred between 3,000 Arabs and over ten roman legions. But it is also important to mention the one possible Byzantine record referring to this Battle has it quite differently:
Aside from the Muslim accounts, there may be a reference to the battle in the chronicle written by ninth century Byzantine monk and chronicler Theophanes.
According to Theophanes, the Muslim army intended to attack the local Arabs on a feast day (the word that Theophanes used most likely indicates a pagan rather than a Christian holiday). However, the vicarius Theodorus (who might be emperor's brother, in this case vicarius augustus (emperor's deputy) is meant, i.e. viceroy) learnt about their plans and gathered a force from the garrisons of local fortresses:
He determined from the Saracen the day and hour on which the emirs intended to attack, and attacked them at a place called Mothous. He killed three of them and most of their army, but one emir, Khalid (whom they call the sword of God), got away.[3]
It has been argued by some scholars, such as Walter Kaegi, that this is a reference to the Battle of Mu'tah, but this is not certain.
Now this of course if sound shows the truely fanciful nature of the Arab record including the supposed death of a general of a roman army and the conversion of Northern Arabs to Islam.
Now what else is left out? What these commentaries conveniently left out when they accused the Christian Arabs of instigating Mohammed into war by killing his men was the fact that Mohammed had already instigated a war between Ghassanids, Byzantines and Muslims as mentioned by George Sale:
"Mohammed wrote to the same effect to the king of Ethiopia, though he had been converted before, according to the Arab writers; and to mokawkas, governor of Egypt, who gave the messenger a very favorable reception, and send several valuable presents to Mohammed, and among the rest two girls, one of which named Mary, became a great favorite with him. He also sent letters of the like purport to several Arab princes, particularly one to Al Hareth Ebn Abi Shamer king of Ghassan, who returning for answer that he would go to Mohammed himself, the prophet said, May his kingdom perish; another to Hawdha Ebn Ali, king of Yamama, who was a Christian, and having some time before professed Islamism, had lately returned to his former faith; this prince sent back a very rough answer upon which Mohammed cursing him, he died soon after; and a third to al Mondar Ebn Sawa, king of Bahrein, who embraced Mohammedism, and all the Arabs of that country following his example.
The eight year of the Hejra was a very fortunate year to Mohammed. In the beginning of it Khaled Ebn al Walid and Amru Ebn al As, both excellent soldiers, the first of whom afterwards conquered Syria and other countries, and the latter, Egypt, became proselytes of Mohammedism. And soon after the prophet send three thousand men against the Grecian forces, to revenge the death of one of his ambassadors, who being sent to the governor of Bosra on the same errand as those who went to the above mentioned princes, was slain by an Arab of the tribe of Bhassa at Muta, a town in the territory of Balka in Syria, about three days’ journey eastward from Jerusalem, near which town they encountered. The Grecians being vastly superior in number(for, including the auxiliary Arabs, they had an army of one hundred thousand men), the Mohammedans were repulsed in the first attack, and lost successively three of their generals"[4]
and Shahid Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari says:
“Among those who were sent to the Christian rulers and tribes, we see the following names: Dihyah al-Kalbī sent to Heraclius, the Emperor of Byzantine; `Amr bin Umayyah Zamrī to the Negus, the King of Abyssinia; Hāťib bin Abī Baltā‘a sent to the Muqawqis, the King of Egypt; and the tribes of Ghassan and Ĥanīfah (in northern Arabia).”“[5]
Ibn Hajar’s explanation of a story when Heraclius received the letter from Mohammed:
"Abu Sufyan saying: Heraclius then asked for the letter sent by Allah’s Prophet The letter was delivered by Dihya to the Governor of Busra (Al-Harith Al-Ghassani), who then forwarded it to Heraclius (Dihya who embraced Islam early was known to have a very handsome face and died during the caliphate of Mu’aawiyyah). The Prophet sent him with the letter to Heraclius towards the end of the 6th year after the Hijrah. Dihya reached Heraclius in the month of Al-Muharram in the beginning of the year 7 H. Busra was a city between Al-Medina and Damascus (not the present day Basra in Iraq). Al-Harith bin Shamir Al-Ghassani, the governor of Busra, forwarded the letter to Heraclius. It is recorded in the Musnad of Al-Bazzar that Dihya handed the letter to Heraclius himself."[6]It is also recorded in Bukhari:
"At that time I had a friend from the Ansar who used to bring news (from the Prophet) in case of my absence, and I used to bring him the news if he was absent. In those days we were afraid of one of the king of Ghassan tribe. We heard that he intended to move and attack us, so fear filled our hearts because of that. (One day) my Ansari friend unexpectedly knocked at my door, and said, “Open Open!” I said, “Has the king of Ghassan come”' He said, “No, but something worse; Allah's Prophet has isolated himself from his wives.”"[7]
What the commentaries have clearly left out on purpose then is the fact that Mohammed had sent a letter to various heads of states including the the King of Ghassan, the Governor of Busra Al-Harith Al-Ghassani telling them and him to: "Accept Islam and live in safety"[8] In other words a declaration of war. Is Islam A Religion Of Peace? Can't be. Al Ghassani having met with Mohammed in person and rejected his invitation to Islam results in Mohammed's cursing him: "may his kingdom perish". This being only one of many kings rejecting him. Later either Al Ghassani or one Arab man from the same or near tribe has ended up killing an ambassador of the Prophet.
It is then said that Mohammed had sent 15 men who to spy on the Ghassands and Byzantine combined gathered forces in which they ignored the command to spy and ended up trying to preach to them, when arrows were delivered to them, instead of leaving they had chosen to stay and die preaching rather than leaving.[9] Clearly an attempt to die as martyrs and ignore Mohammed's instruction to only spy.
It is then in this context that Mohammed has supposedly amassed his biggest army so far in order to extract his vengeance due to the death of these disobedient men. After the battle having failed to defeat the Ghassand and Byzantine Forces Mohammed forces return home in which then Mohammed postpones his attacks.
In fact it is not until approximately two years afterward Mohammed resumes his expedition to North Arabia.[10] You would think of course that if the Ghassands and Byzantines having two separate armies possibly totaling over one hundred thousand soldiers would then have no problem with invading Mecca or chasing this army til it's death. This also makes it look rather absurd that two years later the Byzantine army is said to being gathered in order to attack the Muslims, when they had already been together ready to attack the Muslims two years earlier! Why did they disband in the first place? I thought they were trying to wipe out the Muslims?
That is all then for this part of the discussion. Not only do these events often conflict with the Quranic injunction and given reason for invasion, but they are historically dubious and fanciful. Most importantly these commentators have deliberately omitted some of the most important information.
At least if you are going to appeal to sources outside of the Quran, Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, then be willing to share the whole story. For more information I recommend clicking on footnote 8 which goes into the further fanciful legend of the supposed "Battle of Tabuk" itself. A false claim inciting the "accumulation of Caesars forces to protect his borders" seems to be another pure historical myth, this time even admitted by the commentator Maududi himself when he references the Arab historians.
In the end Maududi himself summaries these passages quite nicely, once again after reading these quotations ask yourself: Is Islam A Religion Of Peace?
Note the three reasons to fight them presented by Maududi:
It turns out even Muslim commentator Maududi is able to exegete the Quranic passages and contradict his own introductory story reasons for war. He is able to derive from the Quran the true reasons Muslims are to fight disbelievers from a plain reading from the text, something that cannot be done by Zaatari and Samatar least they admit Islam is what it is.
In the end Maududi himself summaries these passages quite nicely, once again after reading these quotations ask yourself: Is Islam A Religion Of Peace?
26Though the people of the Book professed to believe in Allah and the Hereafter, in fact they believed in neither. For only that person really believes in Allah who acknowledges Him as the only One God and the only One Lord, and does not associate with Him any other, whatsoever, in His Being, in His characteristics, in His rights and in His powers and authority. But according to this definition of shirk both the Christians and the Jews were guilty of shirk as has been made plain in the verses that follow: therefore their profession of belief in Allah was meaningless. Likewise they did not really believe in the Hereafter, in spite of the fact that they believed in Resurrection. For it is not enough: one must also believe that on that Day absolute justice will be done on the basis of one's belief and actions. One should also believe that no ransom and no expiation and no 'spiritual' relationships with any 'saint' shall be of any avail on that Day. It is absolutely meaningless to believe in the Hereafter without this. And the Jews and the Christians had polluted their faiths because they believed that such things would protect them against justice on that Day.27The second reason why Jihad should be waged against them is drat they did not adopt the Law sent down by Allah through His Messenger.
Note further down on the same page Maududi says:28This is the aim of Jihad with the Jews and the Christians and it is not to force them to become Muslims and adopt the `Islamic Way of Life.' They should be forced to pay Jizyah in order to put an end to their independence and supremacy so that they should not remain rulers and sovereigns in the land. These powers should be wrested from them by the followers of the true Faith, who should assume the sovereignty and lead others towards the Right Way, while they should become their subjects and pay jizyah. jizyah is paid by those non-Muslims who live as Zimmis (proteges) in an Islamic State, in exchange for the security and protection granted to them by it. This is also symbolical of the fact that they themselves agree to live in it as its subjects. This is the significance of "..... they Pay jizyah with their own hands," that is, "with full consent so that they willingly become the subjects of the Believers, who perform the duty of the vicegerents of Allah on the earth. "At first this Command applied only to the Jews and the Christians. Then the Holy Prophet himself extended it to the Zoroastrians also. After his death, his Companions unanimously applied this rule to all the non-Muslim nations outside Arabia.This is jizyah " of which the Muslims have been feeling apologetic during the last two centuries of their degeneration and there are still some people who continue to apologize for it. But the Way of Allah is straight and clear and does not stand in need of any apology to the rebels against Allah. Instead of offering apologies on behalf of Islam for the measure that guarantees security of life, property and faith to those who choose to live under its protection, the Muslims should feel proud of such a humane law as that of jizyah. For it is obvious that the maximum freedom that can be allowed to those who do not adopt the Way of Allah but choose to tread the ways of error is that they should be tolerated to lead the life they like. That is why the Islamic State offers them protection, IF THEY agree to live as its Zimmis by paying jizyah, but it cannot allow that they should remain supreme rulers in any place and establish wrong ways and impose them on others. As this state of things inevitably produces chaos and disorder, it is the duty of the true Muslims to exert their utmost to bring to an end their wicked rule and bring them under a righteous order.As regards the question, "What do the non-Muslims get in return for Jizyah " it may suffice to say that it is the price of the freedom which the Islamic State allows them in following their erroneous ways, while living in the jurisdiction of Islam and enjoying its protection. The money thus collected is spent in maintaining the righteous administration that gives them the freedom and protects their rights. This also serves as a yearly reminder to them that they have been deprived of the honor of paying Zakat in the Way of Allah, and forced to pay jizyah instead as a price of following the ways of error. (source)
32The Arabic word ad-din has been translated into 'ways'. For the word din, as has already been explained in E.N. 204, :Al-Baqarah, is used for the 'way of life' or the 'system of life', which is followed in obedience to the supreme authority.Now let us try to understand the significance of this verse. The object of the Mission of the Messenger is to make the Guidance and the Right Way he has brought from Allah dominant over all the other ways and systems of life. In other words, the Messenger is not sent to allow Allah's Way to remain subordinate to other ways in order to enjoy concessions from them. He is sent by the Sovereign of the earth and the heavens to make His Way dominant over all other ways. And if a wrong way is at all allowed to remain on the earth, it should be tolerated only under its own protection by the payment of Jizyah under the limits conferred by the Divine System as in the cast of the system of life of the Zimmis who pay Jizyah.
- Shirk and disbelief
- They did not adopt the law of Allah and his Messenger
- Because they did not adopt the law, they had to pay jizya as a sign of the bare minimum of tolerance to live considering they reject Islam
It turns out even Muslim commentator Maududi is able to exegete the Quranic passages and contradict his own introductory story reasons for war. He is able to derive from the Quran the true reasons Muslims are to fight disbelievers from a plain reading from the text, something that cannot be done by Zaatari and Samatar least they admit Islam is what it is.
Notes
[1] http://muslim-responses.com/Fighting_those_who_dont_Believe_/Fighting_those_who_dont_Believe_
[2] http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Tafseer/Ulum/Denffor6.html#Q&Q
[3] p.36, The Chronicle of Theophanes, tr. Harry Turtledove, University of Pennsylvania, 1982
[4] (Pg 72 The Koran, Commonly Called The AlCoran Of Mohammed; Translated Into English Immediately From The Original Arabic; With Explanatory Notes Taken From The Most Approved Commentators; To Which Is Prefixed A Preliminary Discourse By Goerge Sale, Gent. A New Edition, With A Memoir Of The Translator, (and with various readings and illustrative notes from Savary’s version of the Koran) In Two Volumes Vol. 1.)
[5] (Islam and Religious Pluralism Translated by: Sayyid Sulayman Ali Hasan First Edition (2004) Published by:Islamic Publishing House, Canada)
[1] http://muslim-responses.com/Fighting_those_who_dont_Believe_/Fighting_those_who_dont_Believe_
[2] http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Tafseer/Ulum/Denffor6.html#Q&Q
[3] p.36, The Chronicle of Theophanes, tr. Harry Turtledove, University of Pennsylvania, 1982
[4] (Pg 72 The Koran, Commonly Called The AlCoran Of Mohammed; Translated Into English Immediately From The Original Arabic; With Explanatory Notes Taken From The Most Approved Commentators; To Which Is Prefixed A Preliminary Discourse By Goerge Sale, Gent. A New Edition, With A Memoir Of The Translator, (and with various readings and illustrative notes from Savary’s version of the Koran) In Two Volumes Vol. 1.)
[5] (Islam and Religious Pluralism Translated by: Sayyid Sulayman Ali Hasan First Edition (2004) Published by:Islamic Publishing House, Canada)
[6] http://bukhariexplanation.wordpress.com/hadith-7/
[7] (The Civilized Principles in the Prophet's Biography) http://rasoulallah.net/v2/document.aspx?lang=en&doc=3829
[7] (The Civilized Principles in the Prophet's Biography) http://rasoulallah.net/v2/document.aspx?lang=en&doc=3829
[8]See the letter given to Heraclius(forwarded by Ghassan, and a similar letter given to Ghassan: http://www.answeringabraham.com/2012/01/quran-929-and-zaatari-and-samatar.html
[9] http://www.answeringabraham.com/2012/02/battle-of-mauta.html
[10] http://www.answeringabraham.com/2012/02/islamic-battle-timeline.html
[9] http://www.answeringabraham.com/2012/02/battle-of-mauta.html
[10] http://www.answeringabraham.com/2012/02/islamic-battle-timeline.html
BATTLE OF MAUTA
Life Of Muhammad (sa) BY HADRAT MIRZA BASHIRUDDIN MAHMUD AHMAD
(2005 ISLAM INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATINS LIMITED)
(2005 ISLAM INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATINS LIMITED)
pg 226 Life of Muhammad(sa)
On return from the Ka‘ba, the Prophetsa began to receive reports that Christian tribes on the Syrian border, instigated by Jews and pagans, were preparing for an attack upon Medina. He, therefore, despatched a party of fifteen to find out the truth. They saw an army massing on the Syrian border. Instead of returning at once with the report they tarried. Their zeal for expounding Islam got the better of them, but the effect of their well-meaning zeal proved to be the very opposite of what they had wished and expected. Reviewing events now, we can see that those who, under enemy provocation, were planning to attack the Prophet'ssa homeland could be expected to behave in no other way.
pg 227 Life of Muhammad(sa)
Instead of listening to the exposition, they took out their bows and started raining arrows on this party of fifteen. The party, however, remained unmoved. They received arrows in reply to arguments, but they did not turn back. They stood firm, fifteen against thousands, and fell fighting. The Prophetsa planned an expedition to punish the Syrians for this wanton cruelty, but in the meantime he had reports that the forces which had been concentrating on the border had dispersed. He, therefore, postponed his plans. The Prophetsa, however, wrote a letter to the Emperor of Rome (or to the Chief of the Ghassan tribe who ruled Busra in the name of Rome). In this letter, we may presume, the Prophetsa complained of the preparations which had been visible on the Syrian border and of the foul and entirely unjust murder of the fifteen Muslims whom he had sent to report on the border situation. This letter was carried by al-Harthra, a Companion of the Prophetsa. He stopped en route at Mauta where he met Shurahbil, a Ghassan chief acting as a Roman official. "Are you a messenger of Muhammadsa?" asked this chief. On being told "Yes," he arrested him, tied him up and belaboured him to death. It may quite reasonably be assumed that this Ghassan chief was a leader of the army which had
pg 228 Life of Muhammad(sa)
engaged and put to death the fifteen Muslims who had tried only to preach. The fact that he said to al-Harthra, "Perhaps you are carrying a message from Muhammadsa" shows he was afraid lest the Prophet'ssa complaint that tribesmen under the Kaiser had attacked the Muslims should reach the Kaiser. He was afraid lest he should have to account for what had happened. There was safety, he thought, in murdering the Prophet'ssa envoy. The expectation was not realized. The Prophetsa got to know of the murder. To avenge this and the earlier murders, he raised a force of three thousand and despatched it to Syria under the command of Zaid bin Harithara, freed slave of the Prophetsa, whom we mentioned in our account of his life in Mecca. The Prophetsa nominated Ja‘far ibn Abi Talib as the successor of Zaidra, should Zaidradie, and
‘Abdullah bin Rawahara, should Ja‘far die. Should ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara also die, Muslims were to choose their own commander. A Jew who heard this exclaimed, "O Abu’l Qasimsa, if thou art a true Prophetsa, these three officers whom thou hast named are sure to die; for God fulfils the words of a Prophetsa." Turning to Zaidra, he said,"Take it from me, if Muhammadsa is true you will not return alive." Zaidra, a true believer that he was, said in reply, "I may return alive or not,
‘Abdullah bin Rawahara, should Ja‘far die. Should ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara also die, Muslims were to choose their own commander. A Jew who heard this exclaimed, "O Abu’l Qasimsa, if thou art a true Prophetsa, these three officers whom thou hast named are sure to die; for God fulfils the words of a Prophetsa." Turning to Zaidra, he said,"Take it from me, if Muhammadsa is true you will not return alive." Zaidra, a true believer that he was, said in reply, "I may return alive or not,
pg 229 Life of Muhammad(sa)
but Muhammadsa is a true Prophet of God" (Halbiyya, Vol. 3, p. 75). The following morning the Muslim army set out on its long march. The Prophetsa and the Companions went some distance with it. A large and important expedition such as this had never before gone without the Prophetsa commanding in person. As the Prophetsa walked along to bid the expedition farewell, he counselled and instructed. When they reached the spot where the people of Medina generally bade farewell to friends and relations going to
Syria, the Prophetsa stopped and said: I urge you to fear God and to deal justly with Muslims who go with you. Go to war in the name of Allah and fight the enemy in Syria, who is your enemy, as well as Allah's. When you are in Syria, you will meet those who remember God much in their houses of worship. You should have no dispute with them, and give no trouble to them. In the enemy country do not kill any women or children, nor the blind or the old; do not cut down any tree, nor pull down any building (Halbiyya, Vol. 3). Having said this, the Prophetsa returned and the Muslim army marched forward. It was the first Muslim army sent to fight the Christians. When Muslims reached the Syrian border, they heard that the Kaiser himself had taken the field with one hundred thousand of his own soldiers and another hundred thousand recruited from the Christian tribes of Arabia. Confronted by such large enemy
pg 230 Life of Muhammad(sa)
numbers, the Muslims half wanted to stop on the way and send word to the Prophetsa at Medina. For he might be able to reinforce their numbers or wish to send fresh instructions. When the army leaders took counsel, ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara stood up, full of fire, and said, "My people, you set out from your
homes to die as martyrs in the way of God, and now when martyrdom is in sight you seem to flinch. We have not fought so far because we were better equipped than the enemy in men or material. Our mainstay was our faith. If the enemy is so many times superior to us in numbers or equipment, what does it matter? One reward out of two we must have. We either win, or die as martyrs in the way of God." The army heard ibn Rawahara and was much impressed. He was right, they said, with one voice. The army marched on. As they marched, they saw the Roman army advancing towards them. So at Mauta the Muslims took up their positions and the battle began. Soon Zaidra, the Muslim commander, was killed and the Prophet's cousin Ja‘far ibn Abi Talibra
received the standard and the command of the army. When he saw that enemy pressure was increasing and Muslims, because of utter physical inferiority, were not holding their own he dismounted from his horse and cut its legs. The action meant that at least he was not going to flee; he would prefer death to flight.
numbers, the Muslims half wanted to stop on the way and send word to the Prophetsa at Medina. For he might be able to reinforce their numbers or wish to send fresh instructions. When the army leaders took counsel, ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara stood up, full of fire, and said, "My people, you set out from your
homes to die as martyrs in the way of God, and now when martyrdom is in sight you seem to flinch. We have not fought so far because we were better equipped than the enemy in men or material. Our mainstay was our faith. If the enemy is so many times superior to us in numbers or equipment, what does it matter? One reward out of two we must have. We either win, or die as martyrs in the way of God." The army heard ibn Rawahara and was much impressed. He was right, they said, with one voice. The army marched on. As they marched, they saw the Roman army advancing towards them. So at Mauta the Muslims took up their positions and the battle began. Soon Zaidra, the Muslim commander, was killed and the Prophet's cousin Ja‘far ibn Abi Talibra
received the standard and the command of the army. When he saw that enemy pressure was increasing and Muslims, because of utter physical inferiority, were not holding their own he dismounted from his horse and cut its legs. The action meant that at least he was not going to flee; he would prefer death to flight.
pg 231 Life of Muhammad(sa)
To cut the legs of one's mount was an Arab custom to prevent stampede and panic. Ja‘far ra lost his right hand, but held the standard in his left. He lost his left hand also and then held the standard between the two stumps pressed to his chest. True to his promise, he fell down fighting. Then ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara, as the Prophetsa had ordered, grasped the standard and took over the command. He also fell fighting. The order of the Prophetsa now was for Muslims to take counsel together and elect a commander. But there was no time to hold an election. The Muslims might well have yielded to the vastly superior numbers of the enemy. But Khalid bin Walidra, accepting the suggestion of a friend, took the standard and went on fighting until evening came. The following day Khalidra took the field again with his crippled and tired force but employed a stratagem. He changed the positions of his men—those in front changed with those in the rear and those on the right flank changed with those on the left. They also raised some slogans. The enemy thought Muslims had received reinforcements overnight and withdrew in fear. Khalidra saved his remnants and returned. The Prophetsa had been informed of these events through a revelation. He collected the Muslims in the mosque. As he rose to address them his eyes were wet with tears. He said:
To cut the legs of one's mount was an Arab custom to prevent stampede and panic. Ja‘far ra lost his right hand, but held the standard in his left. He lost his left hand also and then held the standard between the two stumps pressed to his chest. True to his promise, he fell down fighting. Then ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara, as the Prophetsa had ordered, grasped the standard and took over the command. He also fell fighting. The order of the Prophetsa now was for Muslims to take counsel together and elect a commander. But there was no time to hold an election. The Muslims might well have yielded to the vastly superior numbers of the enemy. But Khalid bin Walidra, accepting the suggestion of a friend, took the standard and went on fighting until evening came. The following day Khalidra took the field again with his crippled and tired force but employed a stratagem. He changed the positions of his men—those in front changed with those in the rear and those on the right flank changed with those on the left. They also raised some slogans. The enemy thought Muslims had received reinforcements overnight and withdrew in fear. Khalidra saved his remnants and returned. The Prophetsa had been informed of these events through a revelation. He collected the Muslims in the mosque. As he rose to address them his eyes were wet with tears. He said:
pg 232 Life of Muhammad(sa)
I wish to tell you about the army which left here for the Syrian border. It stood against the enemy and fought. First Zaidra, then Ja‘far ra and then ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara held the standard. All three fell, one after the other, fighting bravely. Pray for them all. After them the standard was held by Khalid bin Walidra. He appointed himself. He is a sword among the swords of God. So he saved the Muslim army and returned (Zad al-Ma‘ad, Vol. 1, and Zurqani ). The Prophet'ssa description of Khalidra became popular. Khalidra came to be known as ‘the sword of God'. Being one of the later converts, Khalidra was often taunted by other Muslims. Once he and ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf ra quarrelled over something. ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf ra reported against Khalidra to the Prophetsa. The Prophetsa chid Khalidra and said, "Khalidra, you annoy one who has been serving Islam from the time of Badr. I say to you that even if you give away gold of the weight of Uhud in the service of Islam, you will not become as deserving of divine reward as "‘Abdur Rahmanra "But they taunt me," said Khalidra, "and I have to reply." Upon this the Prophetsa turned to others and said, "You must not taunt Khalidra. He is a sword among the swords of God which remains drawn against disbelievers."
I wish to tell you about the army which left here for the Syrian border. It stood against the enemy and fought. First Zaidra, then Ja‘far ra and then ‘Abdullah bin Rawahara held the standard. All three fell, one after the other, fighting bravely. Pray for them all. After them the standard was held by Khalid bin Walidra. He appointed himself. He is a sword among the swords of God. So he saved the Muslim army and returned (Zad al-Ma‘ad, Vol. 1, and Zurqani ). The Prophet'ssa description of Khalidra became popular. Khalidra came to be known as ‘the sword of God'. Being one of the later converts, Khalidra was often taunted by other Muslims. Once he and ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf ra quarrelled over something. ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Auf ra reported against Khalidra to the Prophetsa. The Prophetsa chid Khalidra and said, "Khalidra, you annoy one who has been serving Islam from the time of Badr. I say to you that even if you give away gold of the weight of Uhud in the service of Islam, you will not become as deserving of divine reward as "‘Abdur Rahmanra "But they taunt me," said Khalidra, "and I have to reply." Upon this the Prophetsa turned to others and said, "You must not taunt Khalidra. He is a sword among the swords of God which remains drawn against disbelievers."
pg 233 Life of Muhammad(sa)
The Prophet'ssa description came to literal fulfilment a few years later. On Khalid'sra return with the Muslim army, some Muslims of Medina described the returning soldiers as defeatist and lacking in spirit. The general criticism was that they should all have died fighting. The Prophetsa chid the critics. Khalidra and his soldiers were not defeatist or lacking in spirit, he said. They were soldiers who returned again and again to attack. The words meant more than appeared on the surface. They foretold battles which Muslims were to fight with Syria.
The Prophet'ssa description came to literal fulfilment a few years later. On Khalid'sra return with the Muslim army, some Muslims of Medina described the returning soldiers as defeatist and lacking in spirit. The general criticism was that they should all have died fighting. The Prophetsa chid the critics. Khalidra and his soldiers were not defeatist or lacking in spirit, he said. They were soldiers who returned again and again to attack. The words meant more than appeared on the surface. They foretold battles which Muslims were to fight with Syria.
PROPHET'S LETTERS TO VARIOUS KINGS
Life Of Muhammad (sa) BY HADRAT MIRZA BASHIRUDDIN MAHMUD AHMAD
(2005 ISLAM INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATINS LIMITED)
pg 199 Life of Muhammad(sa)
After settling down in Medina on return from Hudaibiya, the Prophetsa instituted another plan for the spread of his Message. When he mentioned this to the Companions, some of them who were acquainted with the customs and forms observed in the courts of kings told the Prophetsa that kings did not entertain letters which did not bear the seals of the senders. Accordingly the Prophetsa had a seal made on which were engraved the words, Muhammad Rasulullahsa. Out of reverence, Allah was put at the top, beneath it Rasul and lastly Muhammadsa, In Muharram 628, envoys went to different capitals, each with a letter from the Prophetsa,
inviting the rulers to accept Islam. Envoys went to Heraclius, the Roman Emperor, the Kings of Iran, Egypt (the King of Egypt was then a vassal of the Kaiser) and Abyssinia. They went to other kings and rulers also. The letter addressed to the Kaiser was taken by Dihya Kalbi ra who was instructed to call first on the Governor of Busra. When Dihyara saw the Governor, the great Kaiser himself was in Syria on a tour of the Empire. The Governor readily passed Dihyara on to the Kaiser. When Dihyara entered the court, he was told that whoever was received in audience by the Kaiser must prostrate himself before him.
pg 200 Life of Muhammad(sa)
Dihyara refused to do this, saying that Muslims did not bow before any human being. Dihyara, therefore, sat before the Kaiser without making the prescribed obeisances. The Kaiser had the letter read by an interpreter and asked if an Arab caravan was in the town. He said he desired to interrogate an Arab about this Arabian Prophetsa who had sent him an invitation to accept Islam. It so happened that Abu Sufyanra was in the town with a commercial caravan. The court officials took him to the Kaiser. Abu Sufyanra was ordered tostand in front of the other Arabs, who were told to correct him if he should tell a lie or make a wrong statement. Then Heraclius proceeded to interrogate Abu Sufyanra. The conversation is thus recorded in history: H: Do you know this man who claims to be a Prophet(sa) and who has sent me a letter? Can you say what sort of family he comes from? A-S: He comes of a noble family and is one of my relations.
should have four dirhams each, and some cloth to wear (Zurqani and Khamis). The Prophetsa also wrote to the King of ‘Uman, the Chief of Yamama, the King of Ghassan, the Chief of Bani Nahd, a tribe of Yemen, the Chief of Hamdan, another tribe of Yemen, the Chief of Bani ‘Alim and the Chief of the Hadrami tribe. Most of them became Muslims. These letters show how perfect was the Prophet'ssa faith in God. They also show that from the very beginning the Prophetsa believed that he had been sent by God not to any one people or territory, but to all the peoples of the world. It is true that these letters were received by their addressees in different ways. Some of them accepted Islam at once. Others treated the letters with consideration, but did not accept Islam. Still others treated them with ordinary courtesy. Still others showed
contempt and pride. But it is true also—and history is witness to the fact—that the recipients of these letters or their peoples met with a fate in accordance with their treatment of these letters.
(2005 ISLAM INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATINS LIMITED)
pg 199 Life of Muhammad(sa)
After settling down in Medina on return from Hudaibiya, the Prophetsa instituted another plan for the spread of his Message. When he mentioned this to the Companions, some of them who were acquainted with the customs and forms observed in the courts of kings told the Prophetsa that kings did not entertain letters which did not bear the seals of the senders. Accordingly the Prophetsa had a seal made on which were engraved the words, Muhammad Rasulullahsa. Out of reverence, Allah was put at the top, beneath it Rasul and lastly Muhammadsa, In Muharram 628, envoys went to different capitals, each with a letter from the Prophetsa,
inviting the rulers to accept Islam. Envoys went to Heraclius, the Roman Emperor, the Kings of Iran, Egypt (the King of Egypt was then a vassal of the Kaiser) and Abyssinia. They went to other kings and rulers also. The letter addressed to the Kaiser was taken by Dihya Kalbi ra who was instructed to call first on the Governor of Busra. When Dihyara saw the Governor, the great Kaiser himself was in Syria on a tour of the Empire. The Governor readily passed Dihyara on to the Kaiser. When Dihyara entered the court, he was told that whoever was received in audience by the Kaiser must prostrate himself before him.
pg 200 Life of Muhammad(sa)
Dihyara refused to do this, saying that Muslims did not bow before any human being. Dihyara, therefore, sat before the Kaiser without making the prescribed obeisances. The Kaiser had the letter read by an interpreter and asked if an Arab caravan was in the town. He said he desired to interrogate an Arab about this Arabian Prophetsa who had sent him an invitation to accept Islam. It so happened that Abu Sufyanra was in the town with a commercial caravan. The court officials took him to the Kaiser. Abu Sufyanra was ordered tostand in front of the other Arabs, who were told to correct him if he should tell a lie or make a wrong statement. Then Heraclius proceeded to interrogate Abu Sufyanra. The conversation is thus recorded in history: H: Do you know this man who claims to be a Prophet(sa) and who has sent me a letter? Can you say what sort of family he comes from? A-S: He comes of a noble family and is one of my relations.
H: Have there been Arabs before him who have made claims similar to his? A-S: No. H: Did your people ever charge him with lying before he announced his claim? A-S: No. H: Has there been a king or a ruler among his forefathers?A—S: No.
pg 201 Life of Muhammad(sa)
H: How do you judge his general ability and his capacity for judgement? A—S: We have never found any fault in his ability and his capacity for judgement. H: What are his followers like? Are they big and powerful persons or are they poor and humble? A—S: Mostly poor and humble and young. H: Do their numbers tend to increase or decrease? A—S: To increase. H: Do his followers ever go back to their old beliefs? A—S: No. H: Has he ever broken a pledge? A—S: Not so far. But we have recently entered into a new pact with him. Let us see what he does about it. H: Have you had any fight with him yet? A—S: Yes. H: With what result? A—S: Like buckets on a wheel, victory and defeat alternate between us and him. In the Battle of Badr, for instance, in which I was not present, he was able to overpower our side. In the Battle of Uhud, in which I commanded our side, we took his side to task. We tore their stomachs, their ears and their noses, H: But what does he teach? A—S: That we should worship the One God and not set up equals with Him. He preaches against the idols our forefathers worshipped. He wants us, instead, to worship the Only God, to speak the truth only and always to abjure all vicious and corrupt practices. He exhorts us to be good to one another and to keep our covenants and discharge our trusts.
pg 202 Life of Muhammad(sa)
This interesting conversation came to an end and then the Kaiser said: I first asked you about his family and you said he belonged to a noble family. In truth, Prophets always come of noble families. I then asked you if anyone before him had made a similar claim and you said, No. I asked you this question because I thought that if in the recent past some one had made such a claim, then one could say that this Prophetsa was imitating
that claim. I then asked you whether he had ever been charged with lying before his claim had been announced and you said, No. I inferred from this that a person who does not lie about men will not lie about
God. I next asked you if there had been a king among his forefathers and you said, No. From this I understood that his claim could not be a subtle plan for the recovery of the kingdom. I then asked you whether the entrants into his fold were mostly big, prosperous and powerful individuals or poor and
weak. And you said in reply, that they were generally poor and weak, not proud and big, and so are the early followers of a Prophet. I then asked you whether his numbers were increasing or decreasing and you said they were increasing. At this I remembered that the followers of a Prophet go on increasing until the Prophet attains his goal. I then asked you if his followers left him out of disgust or disappointment, and you said, No. At this I remembered that the followers of Prophets are usually steadfast. They may fall away for other reasons, but not out of disgust for the faith. I then asked you if there had been fights between you and him and, if so, with what results. And you said that you and his followers were like buckets on a wheel and the Prophets are like that. In the beginning their
pg 203 Life of Muhammad(sa)
followers suffer reverses and meet with misfortunes, but in the end they win. I then asked you about what he teaches and you said he teaches the worship of One God, truth-speaking, virtue and the importance of keeping covenants and discharging trusts. I asked you also whether he ever played false, and you said, No. And this is the way of virtuous men. It seems to me, therefore, that his claim to being a Prophetsa is true. I was half expecting his appearance in our time, but I did not know he was going to be an Arab. If what you have told me is true, then I think his influence and his dominion will certainly spread over these lands (Bukhari). The speech unsettled the courtiers who began to blame the King for applauding a Teacher of another community. Protests were raised. The court officials then sent away Abu Sufyanra and his friends. The text of the letter which the Prophetsa wrote to the Kaiser is to be found in historical records. It runs as follows: From Muhammadsa, the Servant of God and His Messenger. To the Chief of Rome, Heraclius. Whoever treads the path of divine guidance, on him be peace. After this, O King, I invite you to Islam.
pg 201 Life of Muhammad(sa)
H: How do you judge his general ability and his capacity for judgement? A—S: We have never found any fault in his ability and his capacity for judgement. H: What are his followers like? Are they big and powerful persons or are they poor and humble? A—S: Mostly poor and humble and young. H: Do their numbers tend to increase or decrease? A—S: To increase. H: Do his followers ever go back to their old beliefs? A—S: No. H: Has he ever broken a pledge? A—S: Not so far. But we have recently entered into a new pact with him. Let us see what he does about it. H: Have you had any fight with him yet? A—S: Yes. H: With what result? A—S: Like buckets on a wheel, victory and defeat alternate between us and him. In the Battle of Badr, for instance, in which I was not present, he was able to overpower our side. In the Battle of Uhud, in which I commanded our side, we took his side to task. We tore their stomachs, their ears and their noses, H: But what does he teach? A—S: That we should worship the One God and not set up equals with Him. He preaches against the idols our forefathers worshipped. He wants us, instead, to worship the Only God, to speak the truth only and always to abjure all vicious and corrupt practices. He exhorts us to be good to one another and to keep our covenants and discharge our trusts.
pg 202 Life of Muhammad(sa)
This interesting conversation came to an end and then the Kaiser said: I first asked you about his family and you said he belonged to a noble family. In truth, Prophets always come of noble families. I then asked you if anyone before him had made a similar claim and you said, No. I asked you this question because I thought that if in the recent past some one had made such a claim, then one could say that this Prophetsa was imitating
that claim. I then asked you whether he had ever been charged with lying before his claim had been announced and you said, No. I inferred from this that a person who does not lie about men will not lie about
God. I next asked you if there had been a king among his forefathers and you said, No. From this I understood that his claim could not be a subtle plan for the recovery of the kingdom. I then asked you whether the entrants into his fold were mostly big, prosperous and powerful individuals or poor and
weak. And you said in reply, that they were generally poor and weak, not proud and big, and so are the early followers of a Prophet. I then asked you whether his numbers were increasing or decreasing and you said they were increasing. At this I remembered that the followers of a Prophet go on increasing until the Prophet attains his goal. I then asked you if his followers left him out of disgust or disappointment, and you said, No. At this I remembered that the followers of Prophets are usually steadfast. They may fall away for other reasons, but not out of disgust for the faith. I then asked you if there had been fights between you and him and, if so, with what results. And you said that you and his followers were like buckets on a wheel and the Prophets are like that. In the beginning their
pg 203 Life of Muhammad(sa)
followers suffer reverses and meet with misfortunes, but in the end they win. I then asked you about what he teaches and you said he teaches the worship of One God, truth-speaking, virtue and the importance of keeping covenants and discharging trusts. I asked you also whether he ever played false, and you said, No. And this is the way of virtuous men. It seems to me, therefore, that his claim to being a Prophetsa is true. I was half expecting his appearance in our time, but I did not know he was going to be an Arab. If what you have told me is true, then I think his influence and his dominion will certainly spread over these lands (Bukhari). The speech unsettled the courtiers who began to blame the King for applauding a Teacher of another community. Protests were raised. The court officials then sent away Abu Sufyanra and his friends. The text of the letter which the Prophetsa wrote to the Kaiser is to be found in historical records. It runs as follows: From Muhammadsa, the Servant of God and His Messenger. To the Chief of Rome, Heraclius. Whoever treads the path of divine guidance, on him be peace. After this, O King, I invite you to Islam.
Become a Muslim. God will protect you from all afflictions, and reward you twice over. But if you deny and refuse to accept this Message, then the sin not only of your own denial, but of the denial of your subjects, will be on your head. "Say, 'O People of theBook! come to a word equal between us and you that we worship none but Allah, and that we associate no partner with Him, and that some of us take not others for lords beside Allah.' But if they turn away, then
pg 204 Life of Muhammad(sa)
say, ‘Bear witness that we have submitted to God' "(Zurqani ).
pg 204 Life of Muhammad(sa)
say, ‘Bear witness that we have submitted to God' "(Zurqani ).
The invitation to Islam was an invitation to believe that God is One and that Muhammadsa is His Messenger. Where the letter says that if Heraclius becomes a Muslim, he will be rewarded twice over, the reference is to the fact that Islam teaches belief in both Jesusas and Muhammadsa. It is said that when the letter was presented to the Emperor, some courtiers suggested it should be torn up and thrown away. The letter, they said, was an insult to the Emperor.
It did not describe the Emperor as Emperor but only as Sahibul Rum, i.e., the Chief of Rome. The Emperor, however, said that it was unwise to tear up the letter without reading it.He also said that the address, 'Chief of Rome', was not wrong. After all, the Master of everything was God. An Emperor was only a chief.When the Prophetsa was told how his letter had been received by Heraclius, he seemed satisfied and pleased and said that because of the reception which the Roman Emperor had given his letter, his Empire would be saved. The descendants of the Emperor would continue long to rule over the Empire. That is in fact what happened. In the wars which took place later, a large part of the Roman Empire, in accordance with another prophecy of the
pg 205 Life of Muhammad(sa)
Prophetsa of Islam, passed out of the possession of Rome; yet for six hundred years after this, the dynasty of Heraclius remained established in constantinople. The Prophet'ssa letter remained preserved in the State archives for a long time. Ambassadors of the Muslim King, Mansur Qalawun, visited the court of Rome, and were shown the letter deposited in a case. The then Roman Emperor showing the letter said it had been received by a forefather of his from their Prophetsa and had been carefully preserved. LETTER TO THE KING OF IRAN The letter to the King of Iran was sent through ‘Abdullah bin Hudhafara. The text of this letter was as follows: In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful..This letter is from Muhammad sa , the Messenger of God, to Chosroes, the Chief of Iran. Whoever submits to a perfect guidance, and believes in Allah, and bears witness that Allah is One, and has no equal or partner, and that Muhammad sa is His Servant and Messenger, on him be peace. O King, under the command of God, I invite you to Islam. For I have been sent by God as His Messengersa to all mankind, so that I may warn all living men and complete my Message for all unbelievers. Accept Islam and protect yourself from all afflictions. If you reject this invitation, then the sin of the denial of all your people will rest on your head (Zurqani and Khamis).
pg 206 Life of Muhammad(sa)
‘Abdullah bin Hudhafara says that when he reached the court of Chosroes he applied for admission to the royal presence. He handed over the letter to the Emperor and the Emperor ordered an interpreter to read it and explain its contents. On listening to the contents, the Chosroes was enraged. He took back the letter and tore it to pieces. ‘Abdullah bin Hudhafara reported the incident to the Prophetsa. On hearing the report, the Prophetsa said: What the Chosroes has done to our letter even that will God do to his Empire (i.e., rend
it to pieces). The fit of temper which the Chosroes showed on this occasion was the result of the
pernicious propaganda carried on against Islam by Jews who had migrated from Roman territory to Iran. These Jewish refugees took a leading part in anti-Roman intrigues sponsored in Iran, and had, therefore, become favourites at the Iranian court. The Chosroes was full of rage against the Prophetsa. The
reports about the Prophetsa which the Jews had taken to Iran, it seemed to him, were confirmed by this letter. He thought the Prophetsa was an aggressive adventurer with designs on Iran. Soon after, the Chosroes
wrote to the Governor of Yemen, saying that one of the Quraish in Arabia had announced himself a Prophetsa. His claims were becoming
pg 207 Life of Muhammad(sa)
excessive. The Governor was asked to send two men charged with the duty of arresting this Quraishite and bringing him to the court of Iran. Badhan, the Governor of Yemen under the Chosroes, sent an army chief with a mounted companion to the Prophetsa. He alsogave them a letter addressed to the Prophetsa, in which he said that on receipt of the letter the Prophetsa should at once accompany the two messengers to the court of Iran. The two planned to go first to Mecca. When somewhere near Ta’if, they were told that the Prophetsa lived in Medina. So they went to Medina. On arrival this army chief told the Prophetsa that Badhan, the Governor of Yemen, had been ordered by the Chosroes to arrange for the Prophet'ssa arrest and despatch to Iran. If the Prophetsa refused to obey, he and his people were to be destroyed and their country made desolate. Out of compassion for the Prophetsa, this delegate from Yemen insisted that the Prophetsa should obey and agree to be led to Iran. Having listened to this, the Prophetsa suggested that the delegates should see him again the following day. Overnight the Prophetsa prayed to God Who informed him that the insolence of the Chosroes had cost him his life. "We have set his own son against him, and this son will murder his father on Monday the l0th Jumad al-’Ula of this year." According to some reports, the revelation said,
pg 208 Life of Muhammad(sa)
"The son has murdered the father this very night." It is possible that that very night was the l0th Jumad al-’Ula In the morning, the Prophetsa sent for the Yemen delegates and told them of what had been revealed to him overnight. Then he prepared a letter for Badhan saying that the Chosroes was due to be murdered on a certain day of a certain month. When the Governor of Yemen received the letter he said, "If this man be a true Prophetsa, it will be even as he says. If he be not true, then God help him and his country." Soon after, a boat from Iran anchored at the port of Yemen. It brought a letter from the Emperor of Iran to the Governor of Yemen. The letter bore a new seal, from which the Governor concluded that the prophecy of the Arabian Prophetsa had proved true. A new seal meant a new king. He opened the letter. It said: From Chosroes Siroes to Badhan, the Governor of Yemen. I have murdered my father because his rule had become corrupt and unjust. He murdered the nobles and treated his subjects with cruelty. As soon as you receive this letter, collect all officers and ask them to affirm their loyalty to me. As for my father's orders for the arrest of an Arabian Prophetsa, you should regard those orders as cancelled (Tabari, Vol. 3, pp. 1572–1574 and Hisham p. 46). Badhan was so impressed by these events that he and many of his friends at once
pg 209 Life of Muhammad(sa)
declared their faith in Islam and informed the Prophetsa accordingly. THE LETTER TO THE NEGUS The letter to the Negus, King of Abyssinia, was carried by ‘Amr bin Umayya Damri ra. It ran as follows: In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful, Muhammadsa, the Messenger of God, writes to the
Negus, King of Abyssinia. O King, peace of God be upon you. I praise before you the One and Only God. None else is worthy of worship. He is the King of kings, the source of all excellences, free from all defects, He provides peace to all His servants and protects His creatures. I bear witness that Jesus, son
of Maryas was a Messenger of God, who came in fulfilment of promises made to Mary by God. Mary had consecrated her life to God. I invite you to join with me in attaching ourselves to the One and Only God and in obeying Him. I invite you also to follow me and believe in the God Who hath sent me. I am
His Messenger. I invite you and your armies to join the Faith of the Almighty God. I discharge my duty hereby. I have delivered to you the Message of God, and made clear to you the meaning of this Message. I have doe so in all sincerity and I trust you will value the sincerity which has prompted this message. He who obeys the guidance of God becomes heir to the blessings of God (Zurqani).When this letter reached the Negus, he showed very great regard and respect for it. He held it up to his eyes, descended from the
throne and ordered an ivory box for it. Then he
pg 210 Life of Muhammad(sa)
deposited it in the box and said, "While this letter is safe, my kingdom is safe." What he said proved true. For one thousand years Muslim armies were out on their career of conquest. They went in all directions, and passed by Abyssinia on all sides, but they did not touch this small kingdom of the Negus—; and this, out of regard for two memorable acts of the Negus the protection he afforded the refugees of early Islam and the reverence he showed to the Prophet'ssa letter. The Empire of Rome became dismembered. The Chosroes lost his dominions. The kingdoms of China and India disappeared but this small kingdom of the Negus remained inviolate, because its ruler received and protected the first Muslim refugees and showed respect and reverence for the Prophet'ssa letter. Muslims returned the magnanimity of the Negus in this way. Compare with this the treatment which a Christian people, in this age of civilization meted out to this Christian kingdom of the Negus. They bombarded from the air the open cities of Abyssinia and destroyed them. The royal family had to take refuge elsewhere and to stay away from their country for several years. The same people have been treated in two different ways by two different peoples. Muslims held Abyssinia sacred and inviolate because of the magnanimity of one of its rulers. A Christian
pg 211 Life of Muhammad(sa)
nation attacked and plundered it in the name of civilization. It shows how wholesome and lasting in their effects are the Prophet'ssa teaching and example. Muslim gratitude to a Christian kingdom made the kingdom sacred to Muslims. Christian greed attacked the same kingdom, not caring it was Christian. LETTER TO THE RULER OF EGYPT The letter to Muqauqis was carried by Hatib ibn Abi Balta‘ara. The text of this letter was exactly the same as that to the Roman Emperor. The letter to the Roman Emperor said that the sin of the denial of the Roman subjects would be on his head. The letter to the Muqauqis said that the sin of the denial of the Copts would be on the head of the ruler. It ran as follows: In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. This letter is from Muhammadsa, the Messenger of Allah, to Muqauqis, the Chief of the Copts. Peace be upon him who follows the path of rectitude. I invite you to accept the Message of Islam. Believe and you will be saved and your reward will be twofold. If you disbelieved, the sin of the denial of the Copts will also be on your head. Say, "O People of the Book! come to a word equal between us and you that we worship none but Allah, and that we associate no partner with Him, and that some of us take not others for lords beside Allah. But if they turn away, then say, ‘Bear witness that we have submitted to God.'" (Halbiyya, Vol. 3, p. 275).
pg 212 Life of Muhammad(sa)
It did not describe the Emperor as Emperor but only as Sahibul Rum, i.e., the Chief of Rome. The Emperor, however, said that it was unwise to tear up the letter without reading it.He also said that the address, 'Chief of Rome', was not wrong. After all, the Master of everything was God. An Emperor was only a chief.When the Prophetsa was told how his letter had been received by Heraclius, he seemed satisfied and pleased and said that because of the reception which the Roman Emperor had given his letter, his Empire would be saved. The descendants of the Emperor would continue long to rule over the Empire. That is in fact what happened. In the wars which took place later, a large part of the Roman Empire, in accordance with another prophecy of the
pg 205 Life of Muhammad(sa)
Prophetsa of Islam, passed out of the possession of Rome; yet for six hundred years after this, the dynasty of Heraclius remained established in constantinople. The Prophet'ssa letter remained preserved in the State archives for a long time. Ambassadors of the Muslim King, Mansur Qalawun, visited the court of Rome, and were shown the letter deposited in a case. The then Roman Emperor showing the letter said it had been received by a forefather of his from their Prophetsa and had been carefully preserved. LETTER TO THE KING OF IRAN The letter to the King of Iran was sent through ‘Abdullah bin Hudhafara. The text of this letter was as follows: In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful..This letter is from Muhammad sa , the Messenger of God, to Chosroes, the Chief of Iran. Whoever submits to a perfect guidance, and believes in Allah, and bears witness that Allah is One, and has no equal or partner, and that Muhammad sa is His Servant and Messenger, on him be peace. O King, under the command of God, I invite you to Islam. For I have been sent by God as His Messengersa to all mankind, so that I may warn all living men and complete my Message for all unbelievers. Accept Islam and protect yourself from all afflictions. If you reject this invitation, then the sin of the denial of all your people will rest on your head (Zurqani and Khamis).
pg 206 Life of Muhammad(sa)
‘Abdullah bin Hudhafara says that when he reached the court of Chosroes he applied for admission to the royal presence. He handed over the letter to the Emperor and the Emperor ordered an interpreter to read it and explain its contents. On listening to the contents, the Chosroes was enraged. He took back the letter and tore it to pieces. ‘Abdullah bin Hudhafara reported the incident to the Prophetsa. On hearing the report, the Prophetsa said: What the Chosroes has done to our letter even that will God do to his Empire (i.e., rend
it to pieces). The fit of temper which the Chosroes showed on this occasion was the result of the
pernicious propaganda carried on against Islam by Jews who had migrated from Roman territory to Iran. These Jewish refugees took a leading part in anti-Roman intrigues sponsored in Iran, and had, therefore, become favourites at the Iranian court. The Chosroes was full of rage against the Prophetsa. The
reports about the Prophetsa which the Jews had taken to Iran, it seemed to him, were confirmed by this letter. He thought the Prophetsa was an aggressive adventurer with designs on Iran. Soon after, the Chosroes
wrote to the Governor of Yemen, saying that one of the Quraish in Arabia had announced himself a Prophetsa. His claims were becoming
pg 207 Life of Muhammad(sa)
excessive. The Governor was asked to send two men charged with the duty of arresting this Quraishite and bringing him to the court of Iran. Badhan, the Governor of Yemen under the Chosroes, sent an army chief with a mounted companion to the Prophetsa. He alsogave them a letter addressed to the Prophetsa, in which he said that on receipt of the letter the Prophetsa should at once accompany the two messengers to the court of Iran. The two planned to go first to Mecca. When somewhere near Ta’if, they were told that the Prophetsa lived in Medina. So they went to Medina. On arrival this army chief told the Prophetsa that Badhan, the Governor of Yemen, had been ordered by the Chosroes to arrange for the Prophet'ssa arrest and despatch to Iran. If the Prophetsa refused to obey, he and his people were to be destroyed and their country made desolate. Out of compassion for the Prophetsa, this delegate from Yemen insisted that the Prophetsa should obey and agree to be led to Iran. Having listened to this, the Prophetsa suggested that the delegates should see him again the following day. Overnight the Prophetsa prayed to God Who informed him that the insolence of the Chosroes had cost him his life. "We have set his own son against him, and this son will murder his father on Monday the l0th Jumad al-’Ula of this year." According to some reports, the revelation said,
pg 208 Life of Muhammad(sa)
"The son has murdered the father this very night." It is possible that that very night was the l0th Jumad al-’Ula In the morning, the Prophetsa sent for the Yemen delegates and told them of what had been revealed to him overnight. Then he prepared a letter for Badhan saying that the Chosroes was due to be murdered on a certain day of a certain month. When the Governor of Yemen received the letter he said, "If this man be a true Prophetsa, it will be even as he says. If he be not true, then God help him and his country." Soon after, a boat from Iran anchored at the port of Yemen. It brought a letter from the Emperor of Iran to the Governor of Yemen. The letter bore a new seal, from which the Governor concluded that the prophecy of the Arabian Prophetsa had proved true. A new seal meant a new king. He opened the letter. It said: From Chosroes Siroes to Badhan, the Governor of Yemen. I have murdered my father because his rule had become corrupt and unjust. He murdered the nobles and treated his subjects with cruelty. As soon as you receive this letter, collect all officers and ask them to affirm their loyalty to me. As for my father's orders for the arrest of an Arabian Prophetsa, you should regard those orders as cancelled (Tabari, Vol. 3, pp. 1572–1574 and Hisham p. 46). Badhan was so impressed by these events that he and many of his friends at once
pg 209 Life of Muhammad(sa)
declared their faith in Islam and informed the Prophetsa accordingly. THE LETTER TO THE NEGUS The letter to the Negus, King of Abyssinia, was carried by ‘Amr bin Umayya Damri ra. It ran as follows: In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful, Muhammadsa, the Messenger of God, writes to the
Negus, King of Abyssinia. O King, peace of God be upon you. I praise before you the One and Only God. None else is worthy of worship. He is the King of kings, the source of all excellences, free from all defects, He provides peace to all His servants and protects His creatures. I bear witness that Jesus, son
of Maryas was a Messenger of God, who came in fulfilment of promises made to Mary by God. Mary had consecrated her life to God. I invite you to join with me in attaching ourselves to the One and Only God and in obeying Him. I invite you also to follow me and believe in the God Who hath sent me. I am
His Messenger. I invite you and your armies to join the Faith of the Almighty God. I discharge my duty hereby. I have delivered to you the Message of God, and made clear to you the meaning of this Message. I have doe so in all sincerity and I trust you will value the sincerity which has prompted this message. He who obeys the guidance of God becomes heir to the blessings of God (Zurqani).When this letter reached the Negus, he showed very great regard and respect for it. He held it up to his eyes, descended from the
throne and ordered an ivory box for it. Then he
pg 210 Life of Muhammad(sa)
deposited it in the box and said, "While this letter is safe, my kingdom is safe." What he said proved true. For one thousand years Muslim armies were out on their career of conquest. They went in all directions, and passed by Abyssinia on all sides, but they did not touch this small kingdom of the Negus—; and this, out of regard for two memorable acts of the Negus the protection he afforded the refugees of early Islam and the reverence he showed to the Prophet'ssa letter. The Empire of Rome became dismembered. The Chosroes lost his dominions. The kingdoms of China and India disappeared but this small kingdom of the Negus remained inviolate, because its ruler received and protected the first Muslim refugees and showed respect and reverence for the Prophet'ssa letter. Muslims returned the magnanimity of the Negus in this way. Compare with this the treatment which a Christian people, in this age of civilization meted out to this Christian kingdom of the Negus. They bombarded from the air the open cities of Abyssinia and destroyed them. The royal family had to take refuge elsewhere and to stay away from their country for several years. The same people have been treated in two different ways by two different peoples. Muslims held Abyssinia sacred and inviolate because of the magnanimity of one of its rulers. A Christian
pg 211 Life of Muhammad(sa)
nation attacked and plundered it in the name of civilization. It shows how wholesome and lasting in their effects are the Prophet'ssa teaching and example. Muslim gratitude to a Christian kingdom made the kingdom sacred to Muslims. Christian greed attacked the same kingdom, not caring it was Christian. LETTER TO THE RULER OF EGYPT The letter to Muqauqis was carried by Hatib ibn Abi Balta‘ara. The text of this letter was exactly the same as that to the Roman Emperor. The letter to the Roman Emperor said that the sin of the denial of the Roman subjects would be on his head. The letter to the Muqauqis said that the sin of the denial of the Copts would be on the head of the ruler. It ran as follows: In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. This letter is from Muhammadsa, the Messenger of Allah, to Muqauqis, the Chief of the Copts. Peace be upon him who follows the path of rectitude. I invite you to accept the Message of Islam. Believe and you will be saved and your reward will be twofold. If you disbelieved, the sin of the denial of the Copts will also be on your head. Say, "O People of the Book! come to a word equal between us and you that we worship none but Allah, and that we associate no partner with Him, and that some of us take not others for lords beside Allah. But if they turn away, then say, ‘Bear witness that we have submitted to God.'" (Halbiyya, Vol. 3, p. 275).
pg 212 Life of Muhammad(sa)
When Hatibra reached Egypt, he did not find the Muqauqisin the capital. Ilatib followed him to Alexandria, where he was holding court near the sea. Hatibra went by boat. The court was strongly guarded. Therefore Hatibra showed the letter from a distance and began to speak aloud. The Muqauqis ordered Hatibra
to be brought to him. The Muqauqis read the letter and said, "If this man be a true Prophetsa , why does he not pray for the destruction of his enemies?" Hatibra replied, "You believe in Jesusas . He was ill-treated by his people, yet he did not pray for their destruction." The King paid a tribute to Hatibra
and said he was a wise envoy of a wise man. He had answered well the questions put to him. Upon this Hatibra spoke again. "Before you," he said, "there was a king who was proud, arrogant and cruel. He was the Pharaoh who persecuted Mosesas . At last he was overtaken by divine punishment. Show no pride therefore. Believe in this Prophetsa of God. By God Mosesas did not foretell about Jesusas as clearly as did Jesusas foretell about Muhammadsa. We invite you to Muhammad the Prophetsa , just as you Christians invite the Jews to Jesusas . Every Prophet has his followers. The followers must obey their Prophet. Now that a Prophetsa has appeared in your time it is your duty to believe in him and follow him. And remember our religion does
pg 213 Life of Muhammad(sa)
not ask you to deny or disobey Jesusas. Our religion requires everyone to believe in Jesusas." Hearing this, Muqauqis revealed that he had heard of the teaching of this Prophetsa and he felt that he did not teach anything evil nor forbid anything good. He had also made inquiries and found that he was no sorcerer or soothsayer. He had heard of some of his prophecies which had come true. Then he sent for an ivory box and placed the letter of the Prophetsa in it, sealed it and handed it over to a servant girl for safe deposit. He also wrote a letter in reply to the Prophetsa . The text of this letter is recorded in history. It runs as follows:
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. From Muqauqis, King of the Copts, to Muhammad sa, son of ‘Abdullah. Peace be on you. After this, I say that I have read your letter and pondered over its contents and over the beliefs to which you invite me. I am aware that the Hebrew Prophets have foretold the advent of a Prophetsa in our time. But I thought he was going to appear in Syria. I have received your envoy, and made a present of one thousand dinars and five khil‘ats to him and I send two Egyptian girls
as a present to you. My people, the Copts, hold these girls in great esteem. One of them is Mary ra and the other Sirin ra. I also send you twenty garments made of Egyptian linen of high quality. I also send you a mule for riding. In the end I pray again that you may have peace from God (Zurqani and Tabari).
pg 214 Life of Muhammad(sa)
From this letter it is clear that, though Muqauqis treated the letter with respect he did not accept Islam.
LETTER TO CHIEF OF BAHRAIN The Prophetsa also sent a letter to Mundhir Taimi, Chief of Bahrain. This letter was carried by ‘Ala’ ibn Hadrami ra. The text of this letter has been lost. When it reached this Chief, he believed, and wrote back to the Prophetsa saying that he and many of his friends and
followers had decided to join Islam. Some, however, had decided to stay outside. He also said that there were some Jews and Magians living under him. What was he to do about them? The Prophetsa wrote again to this Chief thus: I am glad at your acceptance of Islam. Your duty is to obey the delegates and messengers whom I should send to you. Whoever obeys them, obeys me. The messenger who took my letter to you praised you to me, and assured me of the sincerity of your belief. I have prayed to God for your people. Try, therefore, to teach them the ways and practices of Islam. Protect their property. Do not let anyone have more than four wives. The sins of the past are forgiven. As long as you are good and virtuous you will continue to rule over your people. As for Jews and Magians, they have only to pay a tax. Do not, therefore, make any other demands on them. As for the general population, those who do not have land enough to maintain them
pg 215 Life of Muhammad(sa)
to be brought to him. The Muqauqis read the letter and said, "If this man be a true Prophetsa , why does he not pray for the destruction of his enemies?" Hatibra replied, "You believe in Jesusas . He was ill-treated by his people, yet he did not pray for their destruction." The King paid a tribute to Hatibra
and said he was a wise envoy of a wise man. He had answered well the questions put to him. Upon this Hatibra spoke again. "Before you," he said, "there was a king who was proud, arrogant and cruel. He was the Pharaoh who persecuted Mosesas . At last he was overtaken by divine punishment. Show no pride therefore. Believe in this Prophetsa of God. By God Mosesas did not foretell about Jesusas as clearly as did Jesusas foretell about Muhammadsa. We invite you to Muhammad the Prophetsa , just as you Christians invite the Jews to Jesusas . Every Prophet has his followers. The followers must obey their Prophet. Now that a Prophetsa has appeared in your time it is your duty to believe in him and follow him. And remember our religion does
pg 213 Life of Muhammad(sa)
not ask you to deny or disobey Jesusas. Our religion requires everyone to believe in Jesusas." Hearing this, Muqauqis revealed that he had heard of the teaching of this Prophetsa and he felt that he did not teach anything evil nor forbid anything good. He had also made inquiries and found that he was no sorcerer or soothsayer. He had heard of some of his prophecies which had come true. Then he sent for an ivory box and placed the letter of the Prophetsa in it, sealed it and handed it over to a servant girl for safe deposit. He also wrote a letter in reply to the Prophetsa . The text of this letter is recorded in history. It runs as follows:
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. From Muqauqis, King of the Copts, to Muhammad sa, son of ‘Abdullah. Peace be on you. After this, I say that I have read your letter and pondered over its contents and over the beliefs to which you invite me. I am aware that the Hebrew Prophets have foretold the advent of a Prophetsa in our time. But I thought he was going to appear in Syria. I have received your envoy, and made a present of one thousand dinars and five khil‘ats to him and I send two Egyptian girls
as a present to you. My people, the Copts, hold these girls in great esteem. One of them is Mary ra and the other Sirin ra. I also send you twenty garments made of Egyptian linen of high quality. I also send you a mule for riding. In the end I pray again that you may have peace from God (Zurqani and Tabari).
pg 214 Life of Muhammad(sa)
From this letter it is clear that, though Muqauqis treated the letter with respect he did not accept Islam.
LETTER TO CHIEF OF BAHRAIN The Prophetsa also sent a letter to Mundhir Taimi, Chief of Bahrain. This letter was carried by ‘Ala’ ibn Hadrami ra. The text of this letter has been lost. When it reached this Chief, he believed, and wrote back to the Prophetsa saying that he and many of his friends and
followers had decided to join Islam. Some, however, had decided to stay outside. He also said that there were some Jews and Magians living under him. What was he to do about them? The Prophetsa wrote again to this Chief thus: I am glad at your acceptance of Islam. Your duty is to obey the delegates and messengers whom I should send to you. Whoever obeys them, obeys me. The messenger who took my letter to you praised you to me, and assured me of the sincerity of your belief. I have prayed to God for your people. Try, therefore, to teach them the ways and practices of Islam. Protect their property. Do not let anyone have more than four wives. The sins of the past are forgiven. As long as you are good and virtuous you will continue to rule over your people. As for Jews and Magians, they have only to pay a tax. Do not, therefore, make any other demands on them. As for the general population, those who do not have land enough to maintain them
pg 215 Life of Muhammad(sa)
should have four dirhams each, and some cloth to wear (Zurqani and Khamis). The Prophetsa also wrote to the King of ‘Uman, the Chief of Yamama, the King of Ghassan, the Chief of Bani Nahd, a tribe of Yemen, the Chief of Hamdan, another tribe of Yemen, the Chief of Bani ‘Alim and the Chief of the Hadrami tribe. Most of them became Muslims. These letters show how perfect was the Prophet'ssa faith in God. They also show that from the very beginning the Prophetsa believed that he had been sent by God not to any one people or territory, but to all the peoples of the world. It is true that these letters were received by their addressees in different ways. Some of them accepted Islam at once. Others treated the letters with consideration, but did not accept Islam. Still others treated them with ordinary courtesy. Still others showed
contempt and pride. But it is true also—and history is witness to the fact—that the recipients of these letters or their peoples met with a fate in accordance with their treatment of these letters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)