the killing of Asma Bint Marwan
- From: "Salahuddin" <Muslim@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 23:02:15 GMT
Introduction
The vulgar Christian missionary, Silas, has accused Prophet Muhammad(P) of
being responsible for the killing Abu 'Afak and 'Asma bint Marwan. The
implications of these charges are that he(P) "stiffles" criticism by
murdering his opponents. In this paper, insha'allâh, we are going to refute
these false charges against the Holy Prophet(P), wa Allah-ul-Must'aan.
Islamic Methodology of Reports' Evaluation
We must explain the methodology of Muslim scholars before we comment on any
Islamic report. Take for example the news reported on Presidents today! If
the Vice-President gives a certain statement concerning the opinion of the
President in a certain matter, then this statement is transmitted by a
member of the secretary to a journalists who published it in the newspaper,
what is the value of this report?
Our answer is that it could be right or wrong and we cannot be sure unless
we know the reliability of the source.
If we find that the report is indeed transmitted by the secretary member on
authority of the Vice-President and that each of them is well known for
accuracy in transmission and truthfulness in speech, how can we evaluate
this report?
Our answer is that we tend to believe it.
This is exactly what Muslim scholars require in any report to be valid and
its attribution to God's Messenger(P) can be accepted. They actually add two
more things; they must make sure that the report itself is not contradictory
to other more authentic reports otherwise it will be considered eccentric!
Also, they must exclude any hidden flaws in the text of the report, these
flaws are detailed in specialized volumes of Hadîth.
Can we then accept the report as valid?
Not yet. After we had verified that the chain of transmitters is intact
without interruption and that all reporters are honest, sane individuals, we
must make sure that each reporter has received the report directly from the
preceding one and that the report itself is in agreement with other
authentic reports without flaws. The eminent hafiz Ibn Kathîr states that
Authentic Hadith is the transmitted hadîth whose chain is continuous through
transmission of an accurate sane memorizer on authority of an accurate sane
memorizer till its termination without being eccentric or flawed.[1]
Is there a method more precise and meticulous than this?
There is no nation in the entire history that took care of reporting events
and their verification as the Muslims have done. The Western Orientalist
Bernard Lewis notes that
>From an early date Muslim scholars recognized the danger of false testimony
and hence false doctrine, and developed an elaborate science for criticizing
tradition. "Traditional science", as it was called, differed in many
respects from modern historical source criticism, and modern scholarship has
always disagreed with evaluations of traditional scientists about the
authenticity and accuracy of ancient narratives. But their careful scrutiny
of the chains of transmission and their meticulous collection and
preservation of variants in the transmitted narratives give to medieval
Arabic historiography a professionalism and sophistication without precedent
in antiquity and without parallel in the contemporary medieval West. By
comparison, the historiography of Latin Christendom seems poor and meagre,
and even the more advanced and complex historiography of Greek Christendom
still falls short of the historical literature of Islam in volume, variety
and analytical depth.[2]
Then we talk about historical references written by Muslim authors. First of
all, these books are not trustworthy references due to the fact that they do
not follow proper methodology of transmission.
Imâm Ahmad ibn Hanbal sums up the Muslim point of view as regards the
trustworthiness of the biographical reports when he declares that the
biographies
....are not based on any principle.
The early Muslim scholars who compiled books of hadîth and scrutinized this
particular field undertook thorough and painstaking investigations to
determine the authenticity of the reports from the Holy Prophet's time by
tracing them back to eye-witnesses of the time, through unbroken lines of
reliable narrators. As a result, they never held a high opinion of the
biographies whose authors had simply copied masses of reports without check
or criticism. One such scholar of hadîth, Hafiz Zayn-ûd-Dîn of Irâq, says
about the biographies as follows:
The student should know that the biographies contain all kinds of reports,
both true and false.
We believe that this should make us depend only upon reliable sources that
have been properly authenticated by Muslim specialists in the Hadith
sciences.
The Killing of Abu 'Afak: Where is The Isnâd?
According to Ibn Sa'd and Ibn Ishâq, Abu 'Afak was a 120 years old Jewish
man who had abused the Prophet(P) verbally, so the latter launched a raid
under the command of Salîm Ibn 'Umaîr to kill him. We do know that Ibn Ishâq
lived in the 2nd half of the 2nd century after Hijra, as well as Al-Waqîdî
from whom Ibn Sa'd (died 230 A.H.) copied the story of Abu 'Afak.
As explained above, the chain of reporters of the story from eye-witnesses
of the event till Ibn Ishâq or Al-Waqîdî must be examined and verified. So,
our legitimate question is: where is the isnâd (i.e., chain of reporters)?
Unfortunately, references of the Sîrah do not provide such information.
Actually, we are told that this story has no isnâd at all; neither Ibn Ishâq
(or his disciple Ibn Hîsham) nor Al-Waqîdî (or his disciple Ibn Sa'd) had
provided such a thing! In this case, the story is rated by hadîth scholars
as "...of no basis", indicating that it has reached the lowest degree of
criticism regarding its isnâd. This is in fact a proper scientific position
because we cannot accept such a problematic story without evidence.
In brief, we have no commitment to accept such a baseless story - according
to scientific criteria of hadîth criticism - which strangely had appeared in
the 2nd half of the 2nd century after Hijra. We are therefore obliged to
reject the story of the killing of Abu 'Afak by Salîm Ibn 'Umaîr at the
Prophet's command.
The Killing of Asma': True Story or Forgery?
Basically the charge is that the Prophet(P) had ordered the killing of Asma'
when she insulted him with her poetry. As it is usually the case where the
history of Islam and the character of the Prophet(P) is concerned, it is
left to the Muslims to throw some light on authenticity of the story in
which this incident is reported by the sources and educate the missionaries
in matters which they have no clue about.
The story of the killing of Asma' bint Marwan is mentioned by Ibn Sa'd in
Kitab At-Tabaqat Al-Kabir[3] and by the author of Kinz-ul-'Ummal under
number 44131 who attributes it to Ibn Sa'd, Ibn 'Adiyy and Ibn 'Asaker. What
is interesting is that Ibn 'Adiyy mentions it in his book Al-Kamel on the
authority of Ja'far Ibn Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn As-Sabah on authority of
Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ash-Shami on authority of Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj
Al-Lakhmi on authority of Mujalid on authority of Ash-Shu'abi on authority
of Ibn 'Abbas, and added that
....this isnâd (chain of reporters) is not narrated on authority of Mujalid
but by Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj and they all (other reporters in the chain)
accuse Muhammad Ibn Al-Hajjaj of forging it.[4]
It is also reported by Ibn al-Gawzi in Al-'Ilal[5] and is listed among other
flawed reports.
So according to its isnâd, the report is forged - because one of its
reporters is notorious for fabricating hadîth. Hence, such a story is
rejected and is better off being put into the trash can.
Prophetic Attitude Toward Women and Old Men in War
Here we are going to discuss the authentic Sunnah of the Holy Prophet(P)
regarding women and old men in war. No baseless or forged reports are
allowed here; we will only display authentic reports.
In brief, the authentic Sunnah of the Prophet(P) prohibits the killing of
women in war.
Narrated Anas bin Malik: A Jewish woman brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep
for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was
asked, "Shall we kill her?" He said, "No." I continued to see the effect of
the poison on the palate of the mouth of God's Apostle.[6]
The Prophet(P) refused to kill a woman who did intentionally try to poison
him, but the Christian missionaries, by using a fabricated story, wants us
to believe that he ordered the killing of a woman who only abused him
verbally. (note: in Islam a women can only be put to death if she commited
murder as crime, for murder is (both for men and women) death punishment in
islam),
Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Messenger of God (peace be upon him) saw the corpse of a
woman who had been slain in one of the raids, and he disapproved of it and
forbade the killing of women and children.[7]
Due to this prohibition, scholars of Abu Hanîfah's madhâb (school of
thought) have stated that apostate women are not to be killed because the
Prophet(P) forbade the killing of women, and since the prohibition is
general it includes apostate women.[8]
Even after the Prophet's demise, his Sunnah remain preserved by the Muslims:
Abu Bakr advised Yazid: "I advise you ten things: Do not kill women or
children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do
not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camel except for
food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty,
and do not be cowardly."[9]
Conclusion
The Western Orientalist Bernard Lewis notes that
>From an early date Muslim scholars recognized the danger of false testimony
and hence false doctrine, and developed an elaborate science for criticizing
tradition.[10]
We have utilized their scientific methodology to expose the false narratives
attributed to the Prophet(P) about the alleged killing of Abu 'Afak and
Asma' bint Marwan. Examination of the isnâd (i.e., chain of reports) has
revealed the unreliability of both stories. Also, an examination of the matn
(i.e., text) has revealed their inevitable contradiction with vigorously
authentic traditions and established Islamic principles. 'Abdûr Rahmân I.
Doi had stated that
As far as the Matn is concerned, the following principles of criticism of
the Hadith are laid down:
(1) The Hadith should not be contrary to the text or the teaching of the
Qur'an or the accepted basic principles of Islam.
(2) The Hadith should not be against the dictates of reason or laws of
nature and common experience.
(3) The Hadith should not be contrary to the Traditions which have already
been accepted by authorities as reliable and authentic by applying all
principles.
(4) The Hadith which sings the praises and excellence of any tribe, place or
persons should be generally rejected
(5) The Hadith that contains the dates and minute details of the future
events should be rejected.
(6) The Hadith that contains some remarks of the Prophet which are not in
keeping with the Islamic belief of Prophethood and the position of the Holy
Prophet or such expressions as may not be suitable to him, should be
rejected.[11]
But critics may have an objection: if these stories are false, then why they
are mentioned in Islamic references in the first place? In response, we have
earlier shown the position of learned Muslim scholars toward these
references in the biographies, whose authors used to relate hundreds of
reports without checking them or relying on serious criticism. These
particular stories even proved their unscientific methodology because they
are reported without isnâd at all. This is extremely irregular of any
respectable scholar. Ibn Jarîr At-Tabârî (224-310 A.H.) in his encyclopedic
book of history Tarikh Al-Umam wa Al-Mulûk did not give mention of these
stories at all despite the fact that he had mentioned far less significant
reports in his work.
Hence, based on the empirical evidence, we can therefore conclude that the
so-called "killing" of Abu 'Afak and Asma' bint Marwan respectively are
inherently false and had never happened. This certainly throws the spanner
into the works of the missionary's conclusions, which is based upon nothing
but hatred, paranoia and xenophobia towards the elect Apostle of God,
Muhammad(P).
And Allâh knows best.
See also:
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/index.php/articles/muhammadp-the-lies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
[1] Ibn Kathîr, Al-Ba'ith Al-Hadîth (Maktabat-us-Sunnah, Cairo, Egypt), p.
28
[2] Bernard Lewis, Islam In History (Open Court Publishing, 1993),
pp.104-105
[3] Ibn Sa'd, Kitab At-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, Vol. 1, pp. 27-28
[4] Ibn 'Adiyy, Al-Kamel, Vol. 6, p. 145
[5] Ibn al-Gawzi, Al-'Ilal, Vol. 1, p. 279
[6] Sahih al-Bukhârî, Vol. 3, Bk. 47, No. 786
[7] Ibid., Vol. 4, Bk. 52, No. 257 & 258. Also see Mutta Malik, Book 21,
Section 3, Number 9
[8] Al-Hasafky, Sharh Ad-Durr-el-Mukhtar, Volume 1, p. 483
[9] Mutta Malik, Book 21, Section 3, Number 10
[10] Bernard Lewis, Op. Cit., pp.104-105
[11] 'Abdûr Rahmân I. Doi, Introduction to the Hadith (A.S. Nordeen, 2001),
p. 15
.
- Prev by Date: Re: womens rights in christism
- Next by Date: Re: christian love at its best
- Previous by thread: USA - The Rise of The Police State
- Next by thread: Jesus considers women as dirt
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
