Answering Islam - A Christian-Muslim dialog

Muhammad the Antagonist Still!

Responding to a Dawagandist’s attempt of vilifying the Meccans
so as to defend Muhammad’s abuse of them

Sam Shamoun

Bassam Zawadi has written a “reply” to my article proving that it was actually Muhammad who first antagonized and threatened the pagans, thereby refuting the Muslim claim that the Meccans actually started the problems with Muhammad and his followers.

Although Zawadi raised a host of issues, all of which I plan on refuting in due time by the grace of the Lord Jesus, here I want to focus on his explanation and defense of Muhammad’s insulting the religious beliefs of the pagans.

Zawadi claims that the way in which Muhammad insulted their gods was by proclaiming that God is actually one!

Notice what they were feeling offended at the Prophet's request to have them believe in one god. This is how they felt they were insulted and how their gods were insulted. They especially felt like their forefathers were insulted when verses like Surah 2:170-171 could be revealed claiming that their forefathers were in error.

To say that this response is desperate would be putting it mildly. Zawadi obviously didn’t bother to read the sources which I provided or, worse still, wasn’t able to understand what he was reading. According to the quotations themselves the Meccans weren’t merely upset over the fact that Muhammad turned all the gods into one. They were also angry over his mocking their gods and insulting their ancestors. Since Zawadi failed to see this point I will quote another Islamic source to help him see more clearly:

(Maketh he the gods One God? Lo! that is an astounding thing…) [38:5-11]. Abu’l-Qasim ibn Abi Nasr al-Khuza‘i informed us> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdawayh> Abu Bakr ibn Abi Darim al-Hafiz> Muhammad ibn ‘Uthman in Abi Shaybah> his father> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Asdi> Sufyan> al-A‘mash> Yahya ibn ‘Umarah> Sa‘id ibn Jubayr> Ibn ‘Abbas who said: “When Abu Talib fell ill, the Quraysh and the Prophet went to visit him. There was, close to the head of Abu Talib, enough room for one man to sit, so Abu Jahl rushed to it to prevent the Prophet from sitting there. They complained to Abu Talib about the Prophet. Abu Talib said to the Prophet: ‘Son of my brother, what is it that you want from your own people?’ He said: ‘O uncle, I want from them one word by means of which all the Arabs will surrender to them and all the non-Arabs will pay exemption tax to them’. ‘What is this word?’ he asked. He said: ‘There is no deity except Allah’. They all exclaimed: ‘Does he make the gods One God?’ The Qur’an was then revealed about them (Sad. By the renowned Qur’an, nay, but those who disbelieve are in false pride and schism…) up to Allah’s words (This is naught but an invention) [38:1-7]”. The commentators of the Qur’an said: “When ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab embraced Islam, the Muslims were overjoyed while the Quraysh was devastated. Al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah said to the nobles and chiefs of Quraysh: ‘Go to Abu Talib and say to him: you are our elder and chief and you know well what these fools have done. We have come to you so that you judge between us and your nephew’. Abu Talib sent for the Prophet and when he answered his call, he said to him: ‘Son of my brother, these are your own people and they are asking you for fairness, so do not swerve completely from them’. The Prophet asked: ‘What do they want from me?’ They said: ‘CEASE MENTIONING OUR DEITIES AND WE WILL LEAVE YOU ALONE WITH YOUR GOD’. The Prophet said to them: ‘Will you grant me one word by means of which you will rule over the Arabs and subjugate the non-Arabs?’ Abu Jahl said: ‘We will surely grant it and grant you ten like it!’ The Prophet said: ‘Say: there is no deity except Allah!’ The Quraysh were repelled and left, saying: ‘Does he make the gods One God? How can One God be sufficient for the whole creation?’ And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed about them these verses, up to His words (The folk of Noah before them denied (their messenger)…) [38:12]”. ('Alī ibn Ahmad al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Does Zawadi not see that the Meccans were already complaining that Muhammad was insulting their gods and fathers and had asked him to stop EVEN BEFORE he invited them to believe that Allah is the only deity? Does this not prove that Muhammad did more than simply preach that there is only one god but that he also reviled, ridiculed, mocked and insulted the other gods which the pagans worshiped?

Nor is this an isolated citation. We find this repeated all throughout the Islamic literature just as the following quotations prove:

Yunus stated, from Ibn Ishaq, “Then Abu Bakr met the Messenger of God and asked him, ‘Is it true what the Quraysh are saying, Muhammad? About you abandoning our gods, ridiculing our intellects, and calling our ancestors pagans?

“The Messenger of God said, ‘Yes indeed. I am the Messenger of God, and His Prophet, He sent me to deliver his message and invite you to God by the truth. For I swear, God is the truth. I call upon you, O Abu Bakr, to believe in God alone, in Him who has no associate. And I call upon you to worship none but Him, and to devote yourself to obeying Him.’

“He then recited the Quran to him. And he neither confirmed nor refused.

“Then he did accept Islam, disavowed the idols, repudiated the other gods and affirmed the truth of Islam. When Abu Bakr went home he was a believer, a man of faith.” (Ibn Kathir, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), translated by professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Ahmed Fareed [Garnet Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, south Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK; The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization: First paperback edition, 2000], Volume I, p. 314; bold and italic emphasis ours)


Yunus b. Bukayr stated that Muhammad b. Ishaq related to him, quoting a man originally from Egypt some forty years previously, from ‘Ikrima, from Ibn ‘Abbas, a long anecdote relating what transpired between the polytheists of Mecca and the Messenger of God. When the Messenger of God arose, Abu Jahl b. Hisham said, “O Quraysh, Muhammad is persisting, as you know, in criticizing our religion, reviling our forefathers, ridiculing our values and insulting our gods. I swear by God that I’ll sit and wait for him tomorrow carrying a rock, and if he prostrates in his prayer, I will smash his head with it! And let ‘Abd Manaf’s people do whatever they like about it afterwards.” (Ibid., p. 337; bold and italic emphasis ours)


“They said, ‘O Abu Talib, your nephew has cursed our gods, ridiculed our values and said our forefathers erred. Either you interpose yourself between us – you disagree with him just as we do – or we’ll take care of him for you!’

“Abu Talib gave them a polite and gracious reply and they then left him.

“There after the Messenger of God continued as before, openly practising God’s religion and calling upon people to embrace it. But then things between them became more heated until the men were mutually hostile and alienated from one another.

“Quraysh discussed the Messenger of God a great deal, complaining to one another and urging one another on to take action against him.

They then went AGAIN to Abu Talib, and told him, ‘O Abu Talib, you have seniority, prestige, and position among us, and we have asked you to keep your nephew away from us, but you have not done so. We can’t any longer put up with his behaviour in reviling our forefathers, ridiculing our values, and criticizing our gods, until such time as you make him desist, or we will battle with him and you in this matter, until one or other side perishes.’ They then said something of this sort, and then they left.

“It grieved Abu Talib to be alienated from his people, and he was neither sympathetic to the call for Islam by the Messenger of God nor to the idea of abandoning him.” (Ibid., p. 344)

There is more:

Ibn Ishaq stated, “When Quraysh learned Abu Talib had refused to abandon the Messenger of God and was determined to break with them in enmity because of this, they went to him, bringing ‘Umara b. al-Walid with them. They told him, as I have heard, ‘O Abu Talib, this is ‘Umara b. al-Walid, the strongest and best-looking young man of Quraysh. Take him and use his mind and strength and adopt him as your own son; he is yours. And hand over to us this nephew of yours who has opposed your religion and that of your forefathers, broken up the unity of your people, and ridiculed our values, so that we may kill him. It will be just one man for another!’” (Ibid., p. 345; bold and italic emphasis ours)


“Nu‘aym b. ‘Abd Allah met him and enquired, ‘Where are you heading, ‘Umar?’

“He replied, ‘I’m looking for Muhammad, that Sabian who has disunited Quraysh, ridiculed their dreams, criticized their religion and slandered their gods. I’m going to kill him!’” (Ibid., Volume II, p. 21; bold and italic emphasis ours)

Moreover, the Quran itself is witness to the fact that Muhammad did more than simply proclaim the unity of God. Zawadi mentioned this passage:

When it is said to them: "Follow what Allah has sent down." They say: "Nay! We shall follow what we found our fathers following." (Would they do that!) Even though their fathers did not understand anything nor were they guided? S. 2:170

But failed to mention the following verses:

And when it is said to them: "Come to what Allah has revealed and unto the Messenger (Muhammad for the verdict of that which you have made unlawful)." They say: "Enough for us is that which we found our fathers following," even though their fathers had no knowledge whatsoever and no guidance. S. 5:104

Verily! Allah forgives not (the sin of) setting up partners in worship with Him, but He forgives whom he pleases sins other than that, and whoever sets up partners in worship with Allah, has indeed strayed far away. They (all those who worship others than Allah) invoke nothing but female deities besides Him (Allah), and they invoke nothing but Shaitan (Satan), a persistent rebel! S. 4:116-117

Do they attribute as partners to Allah those who created nothing but they themselves are created? No help can they give them, nor can they help themselves. And if you call them to guidance, they follow you not. It is the same for you whether you call them or you keep silent. Verily, those whom you call upon besides Allah are slaves like you. So call upon them and let them answer you if you are truthful. Have they feet wherewith they walk? Or have they hands wherewith they hold? Or have they eyes wherewith they see? Or have they ears wherewith they hear? Say (O Muhammad): "Call your (so-called) partners (of Allah) and then plot against me, and give me no respite! Verily, my Wali (Protector, Supporter, and Helper, etc.) is Allah Who has revealed the Book (the Qur'an), and He protects (supports and helps) the righteous. And those whom you call upon besides Him (Allah) cannot help you nor can they help themselves." And if you call them to guidance, they hear not and you will see them looking at you, yet they see not. Show forgiveness, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the foolish (i.e. don't punish them). S. 7:191-199

And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: "These are our intercessors with Allah." Say: "Do you inform Allah of that which He knows not in the heavens and on the earth?" Glorified and Exalted be He above all that which they associate as partners with Him! S. 10:18

He to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and Who has begotten no son (children or offspring) and for Whom there is no partner in the dominion. He has created everything, and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements. Yet they have taken besides Him other aliha (gods) that created nothing but are themselves created, and possess neither hurt nor benefit for themselves, and possess no power (of causing) death, nor (of giving) life, nor of raising the dead. S. 25:2-3

To add insult to injury Muhammad even appealed to an apocryphal legend concerning Abraham’s confrontation with his people regarding their idolatry as a way of insulting and cursing his own people for worshiping idols:

And certainly We gave to Ibrahim his rectitude before, and We knew him fully well. When he said to his father and his people: What are these images to whose worship you cleave? They said: We found our fathers worshiping them. He said: Certainly you have been, (both) you and your fathers, in manifest error. They said: Have you brought to us the truth, or are you one of the triflers? He said: Nay! your Lord is the Lord of the heavens and the earth, Who brought them into existence, and I am of those who bear witness to this: And, by Allah! I will certainly do something against your idols after you go away, turning back. So he broke them into pieces, except the chief of them, that haply they may return to it. They said: Who has done this to our gods? Most surely he is one of the unjust. They said: We heard a youth called Ibrahim speak of them. Said they: Then bring him before the eyes of the people, perhaps they may bear witness. They said: Have you done this to our gods, O Ibrahim? He said: Surely (some doer) has done it; the chief of them is this, therefore ask them, if they can speak. Then they turned to themselves and said: Surely you yourselves are the unjust; Then they were made to hang down their heads: Certainly you know that they do not speak. He said: What! do you then serve besides Allah what brings you not any benefit at all, nor does it harm you? Fie on you and on what you serve besides Allah; what! do you not then understand? They said: Burn him and help your gods, if you are going to do (anything). S. 21:51-66 Shakir

In these next passages Muhammad tells his people that they are liars who are deceived, that they have no sense and that they do not know the truth:

Or have they taken (for worship) aliha (gods) from the earth who raise the dead? Had there been therein (in the heavens and the earth) gods besides Allah, then verily both would have been ruined. Glorified be Allah, the Lord of the Throne, (High is He) above what they attribute to Him! He cannot be questioned as to what He does, while they will be questioned. Or have they taken for worship (other) aliha (gods) besides Him? Say: "Bring your proof:" This (the Qur'an) is the Reminder for those with me and the Reminder for those before me. But most of them know not the Truth, so they are averse. S. 21:21-24

Say: "Whose is the earth and whosoever is therein? If you know!" They will say: "It is Allah's!" Say: "Will you not then remember?" Say: "Who is (the) Lord of the seven heavens, and (the) Lord of the Great Throne?" They will say: "Allah." Say: "Will you not then fear Allah (believe in His Oneness, obey Him, believe in the Resurrection and Recompense for each and every good or bad deed)." Say "In Whose Hand is the sovereignty of everything (i.e. treasures of each and everything)? And He protects (all), while against Whom there is no protector, (i.e. if Allah saves anyone none can punish or harm him, and if Allah punishes or harms anyone none can save him), if you know." [Tafsir Al-Qurtubi, Vol. 12, Page 145] They will say: "(All that belongs) to Allah." Say: "How then are you deceived and turn away from the truth?" Nay, but We have brought them the truth (Islamic Monotheism), and verily, they (disbelievers) are liars. S. 23:84-90

If you were to ask them: "Who has created the heavens and the earth and subjected the sun and the moon?" They will surely reply: "Allah." How then are they deviating (as polytheists and disbelievers)? Allah enlarges the provision for whom He wills of His slaves, and straitens it for whom (He wills). Verily, Allah is the All-Knower of everything. If you were to ask them: "Who sends down water (rain) from the sky, and gives life therewith to the earth after its death?" They will surely reply: "Allah." Say: "All the praises and thanks be to Allah!" Nay! Most of them have no sense. S. 29:61-63

Have you then considered Al-Lat, and Al-'Uzza (two idols of the pagan Arabs) And Manat (another idol of the pagan Arabs), the other third? Is it for you the males and for Him the females? That indeed is a division most unfair! They are but names which you have named, you and your fathers, for which Allah has sent down no authority. They follow but a guess and that which they themselves desire, whereas there has surely come to them the Guidance from their Lord! … Verily, those who believe not in the Hereafter, name the angels with female names. While they have no knowledge thereof. They follow but a guess, and verily, guess is no substitute for the truth. S. 53:19-23, 27-28

Muhammad also repeatedly threatened the pagans with hell and wrath:

And most of them believe not in Allah except that they attribute partners unto Him [i.e. they are Mushrikun - polytheists - see Verse 6: 121]. Do they then feel secure from the coming against them of the covering veil of the Torment of Allah, or of the coming against them of the (Final) Hour, all of a sudden while they perceive not? S. 12:106-107

Have you not seen those who have changed the Blessings of Allah into disbelief (by denying Prophet Muhammad and his Message of Islam), and caused their people to dwell in the house of destruction? Hell, in which they will burn, - and what an evil place to settle in! And they set up rivals to Allah, to mislead (men) from His Path! Say: "Enjoy (your brief life)! But certainly, your destination is the (Hell) Fire!" S. 14:28-30

Certainly! You (disbelievers) and that which you are worshipping now besides Allah, are (but) fuel for Hell! (Surely), you will enter it. Had these (idols, etc.) been aliha (gods), they would not have entered there (Hell), and all of them will abide therein. S. 21:98-99

And they have taken besides Allah aliha (gods), hoping that they might be helped (by those so called gods). They cannot help them, but they will be brought forward as a troop against those who worshipped them (at the time of Reckoning). S. 36:74-75

Finally, these next passages give us an idea of what Muhammad was actually saying to his people and how the pagans felt about his criticisms of their beliefs:

And when those who disbelieve (in the Oneness of Allah) see you (O Muhammad), they take you not except for mockery (saying): "Is this the one who talks (badly) about your gods?" While they disbelieve at the mention of the Most Beneficent (Allah). [Tafsir. Al-Qurtubi]. S. 21:36

And insult not those whom they (disbelievers) worship besides Allah, lest they insult Allah wrongfully without knowledge. Thus We have made fairseeming to each people its own doings; then to their Lord is their return and He shall then inform them of all that they used to do. S. 6:108

These texts clearly presuppose that Muhammad did more than offend the Meccans by proclaiming the unity of god. He also insulted the religious beliefs of the pagans by speaking badly of their gods.

Zawadi thinks he has an explanation of Q. 6:108 which calls into question my exegesis of the text.

Shamoun's arguments fails on two different levels:

1)  He has not shown that it was Muslims who initiated the insults. For all we know they could have been doing it in response to the disbelievers initiating it. The Meccans got fed up and couldn't take it and then wanted it to end and wanted to make a compromise with the Muslims that they would stop insulting as well.

It gets to be really tiring having to constantly and repeatedly point out the fact that Zawadi has a serious inability to correctly understand and actually comprehend the arguments of his opponents. Did Zawadi not read the following?

Ibn Humayd – Salamah – Ibn Ishaq: The Messenger of God proclaimed God’s message openly and declared Islam publicly to his tribesmen. When he did so, they did not withdraw from him or reject him in anyway, as far as I had heard, UNTIL HE SPOKE OF THEIR GODS AND DENOUNCED THEM. WHEN DID THIS, THEY TOOK EXCEPTION TO IT and united in opposition and hostility to him, except for those of them whom God had protected from error by means of Islam. The latter were few in number and practiced their faith in secret. His uncle Abu Talib was friendly to him, however, and protected him and shielded him from them. The Messenger of God continued to do God’s work and to proclaim his message, undeterred by anything. When Quraysh saw that he would not give them any satisfaction, they objected to his departing from their ways and denouncing their gods, and seeing that Abu Talib protected him, shielded him from harm, and would not hand him over to them, a number of the nobles of Quraysh, consisting of such men as ‘Utbah b. Rabi‘ah, Shaybah b. Rabi‘ah, Abu al-Bakhtari b. Hisham, al-Aswad b. al-Muttalib, al-Walid b. al-Mughirah, Abu Jahl b. Hisham, al-‘As b. Wa’il and Nubayh and Munabbih, the sons of al-Hajjaj, went to Abu Talib and said, "Abu Talib, your nephew has reviled our gods, denounced our religion, derided our traditional values and told us that our forefathers were misguided. Either curb his attacks on us or give us a free hand to deal with him, for you are just as opposed to him as we are, and we will deal with him for you." Abu Talib gave them a mild answer and declined courteously, and they left him. The Messenger of God continued as before, proclaiming the faith of God and summoning people to it. (The History of al-Tabari: Muhammad at Mecca, translated and annotated by W. Montgomery Watt and M. V. McDonald [State University of New York Press, Albany 1988], Volume VI, p. 93; bold and capital emphasis ours)


‘Ali b. Nasr b. ‘Ali al-Jahdami and ‘Abd al-Warith b. ‘Abd al-Samad b. ‘Abd al-Warith – ‘Abd al-Samad b. ‘Abd al-Warith – Aban al-‘Attar – Hisham b. ‘Urwah – ‘Urwah: He wrote to ‘Abd al-Malik as follows, referring to the Messenger of God: When he summoned his people to the guidance and light which had been revealed to him and for which God had sent him, THEY DID NOT WITHDRAW FROM HIM AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS PREACHING, AND WERE ON THE POINT OF LISTENING TO HIM. WHEN, HOWEVER, HE SPOKE OF THEIR IDOLS, some wealthy men of Quraysh who had come from al-Ta’if took exception to this and reacted strongly against him, not liking what he said… (Ibid., pp. 95-98; bold and underline emphasis ours)

Does Zawadi not see that according to these quotations the pagans had absolutely no problem with Muhammad preaching about Allah, which means that they were not the ones who started insulting the god of the Muslims? After all, didn’t they also believe that Allah was one of their gods?

Can he not read that the Meccans only objected to Muhammad’s preaching and threatened to insult Allah AFTER Muhammad started denouncing and mocking their gods?

I also quoted the following which Zawadi apparently didn’t bother to read carefully:

The Prohibition of Insulting the False gods of the Disbelievers, So that they Do not Insult Allah

Allah prohibits His Messenger and the believers from insulting the false deities of the idolators, although there is a clear benefit in doing so. Insulting their deities will lead to a bigger evil than its benefit, for the idolators might retaliate by insulting the God of the believers, Allah, none has the right to be worshipped but He. `Ali bin Abi Talhah said that Ibn `Abbas commented on this Ayah [6:108]; “They (disbelievers) said, `O Muhammad! YOU WILL STOP INSULTING OUR GODS, OR WE WILL INSULT YOUR LORD.” Thereafter, Allah prohibited the believers from insulting the disbelievers' idols…

(lest they insult Allah wrongfully without knowledge.)'' `Abdur-Razzaq narrated that Ma`mar said that Qatadah said, "Muslims used to insult the idols of the disbelievers and the disbelievers WOULD RETALIATE by insulting Allah wrongfully without knowledge. Allah revealed…

(And insult not those whom they worship besides Allah.)” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir; capital and underline emphasis ours)

Was Zawadi able to see that according to Ibn Kathir the pagans clearly warned Muhammad that he better stop insulting their gods otherwise they would start insulting his deity? If he did read this then couldn’t Zawadi comprehend the fact that the pagans’ threat to Muhammad actually proves that it was Muhammad who started insulting them and not the other way around? Can it be any clearer than this?

Here is another quote just in case Zawadi still fails to see the point:

(Revile not those unto whom they pray beside Allah lest they wrongfully revile Allah through ignorance…) [6:108]. Said ibn ‘Abbas, according to the report of al-Walibi: “They [the idolaters] said: ‘O Muhammad, either you stop reviling our idols or we will revile your Lord’. And so Allah, exalted is He, warned against reviling their idols lest they wrongfully revile Allah through ignorance”. Qatadah said: “The Muslims used to revile the idols of the unbelievers and the latter USED TO REACT AGAINST THEM. Allah, exalted is He, therefore, warned the Muslims against being the cause which drives ignorant unbelievers, who have no knowledge of Allah, to revile Allah as a result of reviling their idols”. Said al-Suddi: “When Abu Talib was dying, [some chiefs of] the Quraysh said: ‘let us go to this man and ask him to forbid his nephew from reviling our idols, for we feel shame to kill him after he passes away and drive the Arabs to say: ‘He used to defend him but once he passed away, they killed him’. And so Abu Sufyan, Abu Jahl, al-Nadr ibn al-Harith, Umayyah and Ubayy the sons of Khalaf, ‘Uqbah ibn Abi Mu‘ayt, ‘Amr ibn al-‘As, al-Aswad ibn al-Bukhturi went to see Abu Talib. They said to him: ‘You are our master and chief, but Muhammad has harmed us AND HARMED OUR IDOLS. We would like you to call him and warn him AGAINST SPEAKING ILL OF OUR IDOLS. And from our part, WE WILL LEAVE HIM ALONE TO HIS ALLAH’. The Prophet went when he was summoned. Abu Talib said to him: ‘These are your people and cousins!’ The Messenger of Allah asked them: ‘What do you want?’ They said: ‘We want you to leave us alone with our idols and we will leave you alone with your Allah’. Abu Talib said: ‘YOUR PEOPLE ARE BEING FAIR WITH YOU, so give your consent’. The Messenger of Allah said: ‘If I agree to this would you agree to give me one sentence, if you were to utter it, you would rule over the Arabs and non-Arabs alike?’ Abu Jahl said: ‘Yes, by your father, we will give it to you and also give you ten other things like it; but what is it? He said: ‘Say: there is no god but Allah!’ They refused and expressed their aversion at this proposal, upon which Abu Talib said; ‘Son of my brother, ask for something else, for your people are wary of this’. ('Alī ibn Ahmad al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul)

Can Zawadi see that this source expressly says that the pagans REACTED to the Muslims reviling their idols, which again proves that they didn’t start the insults and therefore were not the cause of the problem? Can he also read here that the pagans asked Muhammad to stop reviling their idols?

Will he be able to see their complaints to Abu Talib that Muhammad was harming them and their idols and asked that he stop speaking against their gods? Better yet, will he be able to comprehend and appreciate just how tolerant the pagans were being since they were still willing to work with Muhammad and allow him to continue preaching and worshiping Allah, provided that he stopped insulting their gods?

Even Muhammad’s own uncle, Abu Talib, could see just how fair and tolerant the pagans were being to his nephew!

In fact, the Meccans repeatedly went out of their way to appease Muhammad, doing everything they can to reconcile with him by offering to give him everything he could desire on a silver platter, just as long as he stopped attacking their gods and beliefs:

Yunus and Ziyad related, from Ibn Ishaq, and from a certain scholar, namely a sheikh from Egypt named Muhammad b. Abu Muhammad, from Sa‘id b. Jubayr and ‘Ikrima, from Ibn ‘Abbas, who said, “Leaders from Quraysh chiefs met – and he enumerated their names – after sunset at the rear of the ka‘ba. Some send, ‘Send for Muhammad and speak with him and argue with him SO YOU WILL FIND EXCUSE FOR HIM.

“So they sent a message to him, saying, ‘The chiefs of your people have assembled to with you.’

“The Messenger of God came to them quickly, believing that there had been a change in their attitude to him. He was eager for them to accept the truth for their error, which was painful to him. He sat down with them.

“They said, ‘O Muhammad, we sent for you TO RECONCILE WITH YOU. By God, we know of no Arab who has ever brought his people AS MUCH TROUBLE AS YOU HAVE. You have reviled the forebears, criticized the religion, ridiculed the values, cursed the gods, and divided our community. EVERY UNPLEASANT THING POSSIBLE YOU HAVE DONE to make a rift between you and us.

“If you had come to say these things merely to seek wealth, we would have collected money for you from our own until you were the richest among us. If what you wanted was prestige, we would have placed you in leadership over us. If you had wanted sovereignty, we would have made you a king over us. If what you were bringing us was because of a spirit that had possessed you (they used the word ra’i for tabi‘ meaning spirit) and that may be the case, we would expend our resources seeking a potion to free you from him, or we would excuse you.’” (Ibn Kathir, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume I, pp. 347-348; bold, capital and italic emphasis ours)


Imam ‘Abd b. Humayd stated in his musnad collection of hadith that Abu Bakr b. Shayba related to him, quoting ‘Ali b. Mishar, from al-Ajlah, the son of ‘Abd Allah al-Kindi, from al-Dhayyal b. Harmala al-Asadi, from Jabr b. ‘Abd Allah, who said, “Quraysh met one day and agreed to determine who among them was the most knowledgeable in magic, sorcery, and poetry. That person would then approach the man who had caused dissension, and division amongst them and had found fault with their religion, talk to him and decide how to respond to him. They agreed that ‘Utba b. Rabi‘a was the obvious choice, and they approached him and told him, ‘It is to be you, O Abu al-Walid.’

“‘Utba then went to the Messenger of God and said, ‘O Muhammad, who is better, you or ‘Abd Allah?’ The Messenger of God, remained silent.

“Then he said, ‘Who is better, you or ‘Abd al-Muttalib?’ The Messenger of God remained silent.

“‘Utba then said, ‘If you claim those men to be better than you, the fact is they worship the gods YOU HAVE CRITICIZED. If you claim to be better than them, then speak so we can hear what you say. By God, we’ve never seen any fool MORE HARMFUL TO HIS PEOPLE THAN YOU; you have caused division and dissension among us, CRITICIZED OUR RELIGION and so disgraced us in the eyes of the Arabs that the rumour is current among them that there is a magician or a sorcerer amidst Quraysh. By God, fellow, it seems all we have to await is the cry of a pregnant woman for us all to be at one another with swords till we wipe ourselves out! If it is need that is your problem, we’ll make a collection for you till you’re the wealthiest man in Quraysh; if it is status you want, choose any women of Quraysh you like and we’ll marry you to ten of them.

“The Messenger of God responded, ‘Are you done?’ ‘Yes,’ replied ‘Utba. The Messenger of God then spoke: ‘In the name of God, the Most Merciful and Beneficent. Ha Mim. A revelation from the Most Merciful and Beneficent. A book whose verses have been detailed in an Arabic Quran for a people who are aware…’ and so on until he reached the verse, ‘But if they turn aside, say: “I warn you of a terrible punishment like that which destroyed ‘Ad and Thamud”’(surat Ha Mim, also called surat al-Fussilat, XLI, v.1-13).

“‘Utba said, ‘That’s sufficient. You’ve nothing else”’

“‘No,’ he replied.

“‘Utba then went back to Quraysh and they asked what had happened. He replied, ‘I didn’t omit saying to him anything you talked about.’

“‘And did he respond?’ they asked. ‘Yes,’ he answered. Then he stated, ‘Well, no; by Him who erected it as a building, I didn’t understand anything he said, except that he warned YOU of a terrible punishment like that of ‘Ad and Thamud.’” (Ibid., pp. 363-364; bold, capital and italic emphasis ours)


Ziyad b. Ishaq stated that ‘Utba said, “O Quraysh, should I not go to Muhammad and talk to him and make him offers, some of which he might accept, so we give them to him AND HE WOULD LEAVE US ALONE?” That occurred when Hamza had accepted Islam and Quraysh recognized that the followers of the Messenger of God were increasing and expanding. So they said, “YES, Abu al-Walid, do go and talk to him.”

‘Utba then arose and sat down near the Messenger of God and said, “O nephew, you know the status and respect your people give you, and the nobility of your lineage, but you have caused much trouble to your people. By this, you have destroyed their unity, RIDICULED THEIR VALUES, CRITICIZED THEIR GODS AND THEIR RELIGION, and claimed that their forefathers were unbelievers. Listen to me now, as I make you some offers to consider; perhaps you might be able to accept some of these.

The Messenger of God replied, “I am listening, Abu al-Walid.”

‘Utba went on, “O nephew, if all you want by bringing up this matter is wealth, we will collect money from ourselves for you and so you will be the richest of us all. If what you are seeking by it is honour, we will make you our leader and never make decisions without you. If what you want by it is sovereignty, we will make you our king. If whatever comes to you is some spirit you see but can’t remove by yourself, we will seek out a potion for you and spend our own money to free you from it. A spirit may well take possession of a person until he is cured of it.” His words were similar to these. (Ibid., p. 365; bold, capital and italic emphasis ours)

All of this proves that the pagans were much more tolerant than Muhammad ever was since after he conquered Mecca he threatened to kill any of them if they refused to become Muslims. More on this point later.

Zawadi also asks:

2) After this verse was revealed and the Muslims stopped insulting the Meccan deities, why did the Meccans continue to persecute the Muslims? If all they really wanted were for the Muslims to stop cursing their deities then why continue the persecution? Why continue to chase the Muslims to Abyssinia and try to have them killed?

In the first place, even if we assume that the Muslims did in fact stop insulting the pagans the damage had already been done, peoples’ families had already been insulted, and their gods had already been reviled. It is hard for individuals to simply forgive and forget when their ancestors and gods have been mocked and ridiculed.

Secondly, it is not hard to see why the pagans would chase after the Muslims in order to bring them back. Since their gods had been insulted, their honor had been trampled on, and their fathers had been ridiculed it is only to be expected that the Meccans would want justice and vengeance. In fact, as we shall shortly see Muhammad did the very same thing to those who insulted him and questioned his "revelations." Therefore, what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

Interestingly, the very same sources which say that the Muslims fled for Abyssinia also plainly state that Muhammad had it rather good in comparison to some of the other Muslims, a fact that Zawadi conveniently failed to mention:

Muhammad b. Ishaq, stated, "When the Messenger of God, witnessed the trials descending upon his Companions, he compared this WITH HIS OWN GOOD STATE that derived from his own status with God and from his uncle Abu Talib, and, recognizing that he was unable to prevent the evil befalling them, he told them, 'I wish you would go forth into the land of Abyssinia, for there is a king in whose realm no one is harmed, where truth prevails. Stay there until God gives you relief from your plight.'

"The Companions of the Messenger of God, thereupon left for Abyssinnia fearing the unrest and fleeing with their faith unto God. This was the first emigration that occurred in Islam ..." (Ibn Kathir, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume II, p. 1; bold, capital and underline emphasis ours)

Third, who said that the Muslims actually stopped insulting the gods of the pagans? We find verses which were composed all throughout Muhammad’s stay at Mecca insulting the gods and ancestors of the pagans.

The Muslims continued insulting the pagan gods even in Medina:

… Then ‘Urwah said: “Muhammad, tell me: if you extirpate your tribesmen, have you ever heard of any of the Arabs who destroyed his own race before you? And if the contrary comes to pass, by God I see both prominent people and rabble who are likely to flee and leave you.” Abu Bakr said, “Go suck the clitoris of al-Lat!” – al-Lat was the idol of Thaqif, which they used to worship – “Would we flee and leave him?” … (The History of al-Tabari – The Victory of Islam, translated by Michael Fishbein [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1997], Volume VIII (8), p. 76; bold and italic emphasis ours)

Ibn Ishaq provides a slightly different version:

… Now Abu Bakr was sitting behind the apostle and he said, 'Suck al-Lat's nipples! Should we desert him?' … (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. 502; bold and italic emphasis ours)

What the above references show is that the only reason why the Muslims were told not to insult people's religions is because of the fear that they would then start insulting the Islamic god and his prophet. These quotes also show that such a rule only applies when Muslims are a minority and the disbelievers greatly outnumber them since once Muslims are strong enough to kill people who insult Islam then they do not have to refrain from insulting other people’s faiths. That is why we find Abu Bakr insulting this man's goddess and using profane language. He was now in a situation where the Muslims had power and could murder the man if he had responded back with insults of his own.

This is similar to Muhammad commanding tolerance when he was living in Mecca and greatly outnumbered by the unbelievers. During this stage of his life the Muslims were weak and the rule was essentially turn the other cheek and forgive those who cursed them. Muhammad knew that if the Muslims tried to attack the disbelievers at this stage then he would be running the risk of being defeated and/or killed. However, once Muhammad came into a position of power and the Muslims became dominant the Islamic god changed the rules and ordered his jihadist thugs to murder, plunder, rape and pillage the disbelievers.

What about the monotheists before Muhammad?

To further document the utter futility of Zawadi’s argument that Muhammad insulted the pagans by claiming that there was only one god it is important to remember that there were others before Muhammad who had either converted to Christianity or embraced monotheism. One such individual was Waraqa ibn Naufal, the first cousin of Muhammad’s first wife, Khadijah bint Khuwaylid, and the man Muhammad spoke to after being physically manhandled and tormented by the spirit who came to him in the cave.

According to the Islamic sources Waraqa abandoned the pagan religion of his people and embraced Christianity:

Narrated 'Aisha:

The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), “What do you see?” When he told him, Waraqa said, “That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605)

Now if Zawadi’s claim was sound then we would expect that the pagans would have also persecuted Waraqa for believing that there was only one God, thereby turning all the gods into one, much like Muhammad was accused of doing. However, such is not the case since Waraqa continued to live peaceably with the pagans in Mecca and was free to preach and believe in whatever religion he wanted.

This in turn exposes the utter weakness of Zawadi’s explanation since it proves that the pagans didn’t have a problem with Muhammad choosing to believe in one god. In fact, all of the sources that I cited clearly stated that the pagans even listened to Muhammad when he spoke of his god. They had a problem with Muhammad making fun of their gods and ancestors.

Muhammad’s treatment of those who ridiculed him

In order to more fully appreciate just how tolerant the pagans were towards Muhammad all we have to do is compare their response with how Muhammad responded to anyone who would dare challenge and criticize him.

According to the hadith and sirah literature Muhammad had his followers brutally murder anyone who made fun of him or his beliefs. Here are some examples:

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:

A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.

He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.

He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.

Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4348)


Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib:

A Jewess used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. A man strangled her till she died. The Apostle of Allah declared that no recompense was payable for her blood. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4349)

Muhammad also ordered the murder of an old man and a young woman for lampooning him and criticizing his evil actions through poetry:


Abu `Afak was one of B. (tribe) `Amr b. `Auf of the B. `Ubayda clan. He showed his disaffection when the apostle killed al-Harith b. Samit and said:

Long have I lived but never have I seen
An assembly or collection of people
More faithful to their undertaking
And their allies when called upon
Than the sons of Qayla when they assembled,
Men who overthrew mountains and never submitted.
A rider who came to them split them in two (saying)
"Permitted", "Forbidden" of all sorts of things.
Had you believed in glory or kingship
You would have followed Tubba`.

The apostle said, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" Whereupon Salim b. `Umayr, brother of B. `Amr b. `Auf one of the "weepers", went forth and killed him. Umama b. Muzayriya said concerning that:

You gave the lie to God's religion and the man Ahmad!
By him who was your father, evil is the son he produced!
A hanif gave you a thrust in the night saying
"Take that Abu `Afak in spite of your age!"
Though I knew whether it was man or jinn
Who slew you in the dead of night (I would say naught)

(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. 675)


When the apostle heard what she had said he said, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?" Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!" When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her", so Umayr went back to his people.

Now there was a great commotion among B. Khatma that day about the affair of bint [girl] Marwan. She had five sons, and when Umayr went to them from the apostle he said, "I have killed bint Marwan, O sons of Khatma. Withstand me if you can; don't keep me waiting." That was the first day Islam became powerful among B. Khatma; before that those who were Muslims concealed the fact. The first of them to accept Islam was Umayr b. Adiy who was called the "Reader", and Abdullah b. Aus and Khuzayma b. Thabit. The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam." (Ibid., p. 676)

Here is another version of these murders:


Then (occurred) the sariyyah of Umayr ibn ‘Adi Ibn Kharashah al-Khatmi against ‘Asma Bint Marwan, of Banu Umayyah Ibn Zayd, when five nights had remained from the month of Ramadan, in the beginning of the nineteenth month from the hijrah of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him. ‘Asma was the wife of Yazid Ibn Zayd Ibn Hisn al-Khatmi. She used to revile Islam, offend the Prophet and instigate the (people) against him. She composed verses. ‘Umayr Ibn ‘Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind, and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her chest till it pierced up to her back. Then he offered the morning prayers with the Prophet at al-Madinah… The Apostle of Allah said to him: Have you slain the daughter of Marwan? He said: Yes. Is there something more for me to do? He said: No. Two goats will butt together about her. This was the word that was first heard from the Apostle of Allah. The Apostle of Allah called ‘Umayr, basir (the seeing).


Then occurred the sariyyah of Salim Ibn ‘Umayr al-‘Amri against Abu ‘Afak, the Jew, in Shawwal in the beginning of the twentieth month from the hijrah of the Apostle of Allah. Abu Afak, was from Banu ‘Amr Ibn ‘Awf, and was an old man who had attained the age of one hundred and twenty years. He was a Jew, and used to instigate the people against the Apostle of Allah and composed (satirical) verses. Salim Ibn ‘Umayr who was one of the great weepers and who had participated in Badr, said: I take a vow that I shall either kill Abu ‘Afak or die before him. He waited for an opportunity until a hot night came, and Abu ‘Afak slept in an open place. Salim Ibn ‘Umayr knew it, so he placed the sword on his liver and pressed it till it reached his bed. The enemy of Allah screamed and the people, who were his followers rushed to him, took him to his house and interred him. (Ibn Sa'ad's Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, English translation by S. Moinul Haq, M.A., PH.D assisted by H.K. Ghazanfar M.A. [Kitab Bhavan Exporters & Importers, 1784 Kalan Mahal, Daryaganj, New Delhi - 110 002 India), Volume II, pp. 30-31; bold emphasis ours)

Moreover, Islamic law demands that anyone who insults Muhammad must be murdered:

Know that all who curse Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, or blame him or attribute imperfection to him in his person, his lineage, his deen or any of his qualities, or alludes to that or its like by any means whatsoever, whether in the form of a curse or contempt or belittling him or detracting from him or finding fault with him or maligning him, the judgement regarding such a person is the same as the judgement against anyone who curses him. He is killed as we shall make clear. This judgement extends to anything which amounts to a curse or disparagement. We have no hesitation concerning this matter, be it a clear statement or allusion.

The same applies to anyone who curses him, invokes against him, desires to harm him, ascribes to him what does not befit his position or jokes about his mighty affair with foolish talk, satire, disliked words or jokes, or reviles him because of any affliction or trial which happened to him or disparages him, because of any of the permissible and well-known human events which happened to him. All of this is the consensus of the 'ulama' and the imams of fatwa from the time of the Companions until today.

Abu Bakr ibn al-Mundhir said that the bulk of the people of knowledge agree that whoever curses the Prophet is killed. These include Malik ibn Anas, al-Layth, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, and it is the position of the Shafi'i school. Qadi Abu'l-Fadl said that it is based on the statement of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq. His repentance is not accepted. Something similar was stated by Abu Hanifa and his people, ath-Thawri and the people of Kufa and al-Awza'i about the Muslims. However, they said that it constitutes apostasy.

At-Tabari related something similar from Abu Hanifa and his companions about anyone who disparages the Prophet, proclaims himself quit of him or calls him a liar.

Sahnun said about those who curse the Prophet, "This is apostasy in exactly the same way as heresy (zandaqa) is. Therefore there is some dispute about whether such a person should be called to repent (as a Muslim) or whether he is an unbeliever. Is he to be killed by a hadd-punishment (as a Muslim) or for disbelief?" We will make this clear in Chapter Two. We do not know of any dispute among the 'ulama' of the community and the Salaf regarding the permissibility of shedding his blood.

Several people have mentioned that the consensus is that he is to be killed and considered an unbeliever. One of the Dhahirites, Abu Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Farisi, however, indicated that there is some disagreement about whether to consider someone who belittles the Prophet as an unbeliever. The best-known position has already been stated.

Muhammad ibn Sahnun said that the 'ulama' agree that anyone who reviles the Prophet and disparages him is an unbeliever and the threat of Allah's punishment is on him. The community's judgement on him is that he be killed. Anyone who has any doubts about such a person's disbelief and punishment is also an unbeliever. For a proof of this, Ibrahim ibn Husayn ibn Khalid, the faqih, uses the instance of Khalid ibn al-Walid killing Malik ibn Nuwayra for referring to the Prophet as "your companion."'

Abu Sulayman al-Khattabi said, "I do not know of any Muslim who disagrees about the necessity of killing such a person if he is a Muslim."

Ibn al-Qasim reports from Malik in the book of Ibn Sahnun, the Mabsut, and the 'Utibiyya and Ibn Mutarrif relates the same from Malik in the book of Ibn Habib, "Any Muslim who curses the Prophet is killed without being asked to repent."

Ibn al-Qasim said in the 'Utibiyya, "Anyone who curses him, reviles him, finds fault with him or disparages him is killed. The community say that he should be killed just like the dualist. Allah made it obligatory to respect the Prophet and be dutiful to him."

In the Mabsut from 'Uthman ibn Kinana we find, "Any Muslim who reviles the Prophet is killed or crucified without being asked to repent. The Imam can choose between crucifying him or killing him." In the variant of Abu'l-Mus'ab and Ibn Abi Uways, they heard Malik say, "Anyone who curses the Messenger of Allah reviles him, finds fault with him or disparages him is killed, be he Muslim or unbeliever, without being asked to repent."

Asbagh said, "He is killed in every case, whether he conceals it or makes it public, without being asked to repent because his repentance is not recognised." 'Abdullah ibn 'Abdu'l-Hakam said that and at-Tabari related something similar from Malik Ibn Wahb related that Malik said, "Anyone who says that the Prophet's cloak (or button) was dirty, thereby intending to find fault with him, should be killed.” …

Ahmad ibn Abi Sulayman, the companion of Sahnun, said, “Anyone who says that the Prophet was black should be killed.” (Muhammad Messenger of Allah (Ash-Shifa of Qadi 'Iyad), translated by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah Press, Inverness, Scotland, U.K. 1991; third reprint, paperback], Part Four. The judgements concerning those who think the Prophet imperfect or curse him, Chapter One: Clarification about cursing the prophet or saying that he is imperfect by allusion or clear statement, Section One. The Judgement of the Shari'a regarding someone who curses or disparages the Prophet, pp. 373-374, 375; bold emphasis ours)

In order to prove that this ruling is correct the Qadi presents some cases of individuals who were murdered by the express orders of Muhammad for mocking or criticizing him:

In a sound hadith the Prophet commanded that Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf be killed. He asked, "Who will deal with Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf? He has harmed Allah and His Messenger." He sent someone to assassinate him without calling him to Islam, in distinction to other idol-worshippers. The cause of that lay in his causing harm to the Prophet. That indicates that the Prophet had him killed for something other than idol-worship. It was for causing harm. Abu Rafi,' who used to harm the Messenger of Allah and work against him, was also killed.

Similarly on the Day of the Conquest, he ordered the killing of Ibn Khatal and his two slavegirls who used to sing his curses on the Prophet.

In another hadith about a man who used to curse the Prophet, the Prophet said, "Who will save me from my enemy?" Khalid said, "I will," so the Prophet sent him out and he killed him.

Similarly the Prophet commanded that a group of unbelievers who used to injure and curse him, like an-Nadr ibn al-Harith and 'Uqba ibn Abi Mu'ayt, be killed. He promised that a group of them would be killed before and after the conquest. They were all killed except for those who hurried to become Muslim before they were overpowered. Al-Bazzar related from Ibn 'Abbas that 'Uqba ibn Abi Mu'ayt cried out, "O company of Quraysh, why is it that I alone among you am to be killed without war?" The Prophet said, "For your disbelief and your forging lies against the Messenger of Allah."

'Abdu'r-Razzaq mentioned that a man cursed the Prophet, causing the Prophet to say, "Who will save me from my enemy?" Az-Zubayr said, "I will." He sent az-Zubayr and he killed him.

It is related that a woman used to curse the Prophet and he said, "Who will save me from my enemy?" Khalid ibn al-Walid went out and killed her.

It is related that a man forged lies against the Prophet and he sent 'Ali and az-Zubayr to kill him.

Ibn Qani' related that a man came to the Prophet and said, "Messenger of Allah, I heard my father say something ugly about you, SO I KILLED HIM," AND THAT DID NOT DISTRESS THE PROPHET.

Al-Mujahir ibn Abi Umayya, the Amir of Yemen, reported to Abu Bakr that a woman there in the time of the Ridda chanted curses against the Prophet, so he cut off her hand AND PULLED OUT HER FRONT TEETH. When Abu Bakr heard that, he said to him, "If you had not done what you already did, I would have commanded you to kill her because the hadd regarding the Prophet is not like the hadd regarding others."

Ibn 'Abbas said that a woman from Khatma satirised the Prophet and the Prophet said, "Who will deal with her for me?" A man from her people said, "I will, Messenger of Allah." The man got up and went and killed her. He told the Prophet who said, "Two goats will not lock horns over her."2

Ibn 'Abbas said that a blind man had an umm walad who used to curse the Prophet. He scolded her and restrained her, but she would not be restrained. That night she began to attack and revile the Prophet, so he killed her. He told the Prophet about that and he said he had shed her blood with impunity

Harun ar-Rashid asked Malik about a man who had reviled the Prophet and he mentioned to him that the fuqaha' of Iraq had given a fatwa that he be flogged. Malik became angry and said, "Amir al-Mu'minin! There is no continuation for a community after it curses its Prophet! Whoever curses the Companions of the Prophet is to be flogged."

I do not know which of those Iraqi fuqaha' gave Harun ar-Rashid that fatwa. We have already mentioned that the school of the people of Iraq is that he be killed. Perhaps they were among those who were not known for knowledge or those whose fatwas were unreliable or idiosyncratic, or it is possible that what the man said was not taken to be a curse and there was a dispute as to whether or not it was a curse or he had retracted it and repented of it. None of these things were mentioned to Malik at all. However, the consensus is that anyone who curses him is to be killed as we have already stated.

That he is to be killed can be deduced by reflection and consideration. Anyone who curses or disparages the Prophet has shown clear symptoms of the sickness of his heart and proof of his real convictions and belief. That is why most of the 'ulama' judge him to be an apostate. This is what is transmitted by the people of Syria from Malik, al-Awza'i, ath-Thawri, Abu Hanifa and the people of Kufa.

The other position is that it is not a proof of disbelief, and so the person in question is killed by the hadd-punishment but he is not adjudged to be an unbeliever unless he persists in his words, not denying them nor refraining from them. To be judged an unbeliever, his statement must either be a clear statement of disbelief, like calling the Prophet a liar, or originate from mocking words and censure. His open avowal of what he said and lack of repentance for it is an indication that he finds it lawful and this constitutes disbelief, so there is no disagreement that he is an unbeliever. Allah says about people like this, "They swear by Allah that they did not speak. They said the words of disbelief. They disbelieved after their Islam." (9:76)

The commentators said that this refers to the statement, "If what is said by Muhammad is true, we are worse than monkeys."

It is said that it refers to what one of them said, "Our likeness with respect to that of Muhammad is only as the words of the one who says, 'Feed your dog and it will devour you.' When we return to Madina, the mighty will drive out the weaker."

It is said that even if the one who says this conceals it, the same judgement applies to him as to the heretic and he is killed because he has changed his deen. The Prophet said, "Strike off the heads of all who change their deen."

Because upholding the Prophet's honour is an obligation owed by his entire community and anyone who curses a free man of his community is given a hadd-punishment, the punishment of someone who curses the Prophet is that he is to be is killed because of the immensity of the worth of the Prophet and his elevation over others. (Ibid., Section Two. The proof of the necessity of killing anyone who curses the Prophet or finds fault with him, pp. 378-380)

The translator has a note identifying the woman from Khatma:

2. A tribe allied to the Aws. She was 'Usma' bint Marwan. (Ibid., p. 378)

I.e., Asma bint Marwan, the young woman whom the Islamic sources say was brutally murdered while breastfeeding heir child! But didn’t the Qadi know better than to use the incident of Asma to establish this Islamic ruling since her story is based on a weak narration according to Muslim propagandists like Zawadi? Or should we see this assertion for what it truly is, i.e. this is nothing more than a canard and smokescreen which Muslim dawagandists like Zawadi always bring up whenever they cannot defend their position?

What makes some of these murders all the more reprehensible is that some of these individuals were killed for simply writing poetry criticizing Muhammad’s violent crimes!

Ironically, Muhammad himself ordered his own followers to compose poems mocking his opponents!

Narrated Al-Bara:
The Prophet said to Hassan, "LAMPOON them (the pagans) in verse, and Gabriel is with you." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 73, Number 174)

Narrated Al-Bara:
The Prophet said to Hassan, "ABUSE THEM (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e., supports you)." (Through another group of sub narrators) Al-Bara bin Azib said, "On the day of Quraiza’s (besiege), Allah’s Apostle said to Hassan bin Thabit, ‘ABUSE THEM (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e. supports you).’" (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 449)

Here we see that it was perfectly okay for Muhammad to mock people’s beliefs just as long as they didn’t mock him or his teachings. We also see that it was alright for Muhammad to have his followers compose poems ridiculing his opponents, but it was not okay when the disbelievers did the same exact thing to him!

To make matters worse Muhammad is reported to have said that poetry was actually from Satan!

"The Messenger of God moved a little away from his tent and prayed. He travelled on the rest of that day and night and arrived next morning in Tabuk. He gave appropriate praise and thanks to God, then said ... ‘Doubting is from disbelief. Wailing in mourning is from jahiliyya. Fraud is of the soil spread in hell. POETRY COMES FROM SATAN. Women are the snares of Satan. Youth is an offshoot of madness. The worst income is that from interest. The worst food is consuming the wealth of orphans ...’" (Ibn Kathir, The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume IV, p. 16; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Now doesn’t this mean that Muhammad was encouraging his followers to sin against Allah by participating in a satanic act? And wouldn’t this indicate that Hasan was actually inspired and supported by Satan whom Muhammad claimed was Gabriel? Or would Zawadi like us to believe that all poetry is from Satan except the ones that are commissioned by Muhammmad?!

Whatever the case, these examples not only prove that the Meccans were much more tolerable than Muhammad and his followers, and put up with a lot more than Muhammad had to ever put up with, they further show just how inconsistent and hypocritical Muhammad and his followers truly were. Muhammad’s motto clearly was, “we do unto others what we will never allow others to do to us!”

The Slaughter which Muhammad Brought

I had quoted al-Tabari to document that Muhammad had threatened to murder the pagans while he was at Mecca.

Ibn Humayd- Salamah- Muhammad b. Ishaq- Yahya b. ‘Urwah b. al-Zubayr- his father ‘Urwah-‘Abdallah b. ‘Amr b. al-‘As: I said to him, "What was the worst attack you saw by Quraysh upon the Messenger of God when they openly showed their enmity to him?" He replied, "I was with them when THEIR NOBLES assembled one day in the Hijr and discussed the Messenger of God. They said, ‘We have never seen the like of what we have endured from this man. He has derided our traditional values, abused our forefathers, reviled our religion, caused division among us, and insulted our gods. We have endured a great deal from him,’ or words to that effect. While they were saying this, the Messenger of God suddenly appeared and walked up and kissed the Black Stone. Then he passed by them while performing the circumambulation, and as he did so they made some slanderous remarks about him. I could see from the Messenger of God’s face that he had heard them, but he went on. When he passed the second time they made similar remarks, and I could see from his face that he had heard them, but again he went on. Then he passed them the third time, and they made similar remarks; but this time he stopped and said, ‘Hear, men of Quraysh. By Him in whose hand Muhammad’s soul rests, I have brought you slaughter.’ They were gripped by what he said, and it was as though every man of them had a bird perched on his head; even those of them who had been urging the severest measures against him previously spoke in conciliatory ways to him, using the politest expressions they could think of, and said, ‘Depart in true guidance, Abu al-Qasim; by God you were never ignorant.’

Muhammad clearly warned the nobles or the chiefs of Mecca that he had come to slaughter them.

Here is Zawadi’s “response.”

There are two possible ways to understand this narration. One is literally and the second is metaphorically.

The literal understanding of the Arabic word dhabh (translated as slaughter) has us to understand that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was speaking about a particular group of people from the Quraysh and not all of them just as Sheikh Al-Munajjid states. This is clear because we know that the Prophet eventually forgave the Quraysh after the conquest of Mecca and did not slaughter them...

It seems most plausible to me that the Prophet intended to communicate to the Quraysh they will be doomed to peril and destruction if they continued their ways and habits and not that he is intending to massacre them.

This is simply another example of why Zawadi shouldn’t be writing articles defending Islam or criticizing the Holy Bible.

According to the Islamic sources Muhammad did carry out his plan since he had his follows murder the chiefs of the Quraysh at the Battle of Badr:

Narrated Abdullah:

Once the Prophet was offering the prayer in the shade of the Ka'ba. Abu Jahl and some Quraishi men sent somebody to bring the abdominal contents of a she camel which had been slaughtered somewhere in Mecca, and when he brought them, they put them over the Prophet. Then Fatima (i.e. the Prophet's daughter) came and threw them away from him, and he said, "O Allah! Destroy (the pagans of) Quraish; O Allah! Destroy Quraish; O Allah Destroy Quraish," naming especially Abu Jahl bin Hisham, 'Utba bin Rabi'a, Shaiba bin Rabi'a, Al Walid bin 'Utba, Ubai bin Khalaf and 'Uqba bin Abi Mitt. (The narrator, 'Abdullah added, "I saw them all killed and thrown in the Badr well). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 185)

This shows that when Muhammad said he came to bring slaughter to the Quraish he specifically meant their chiefs. And:

Narrated 'Abdullah:

While the Prophet was in the state of prostration, surrounded by a group of people from Quraish pagans. 'Uqba bin Abi Mu'ait came and brought the intestines of a camel and threw them on the back of the Prophet. The Prophet did not raise his head from prostration till Fatima (i.e. his daughter) came and removed those intestines from his back, and invoked evil on whoever had done (the evil deed). The Prophet said, "O Allah! Destroy the chiefs of Quraish, O Allah! Destroy Abu Jahl bin Hisham, 'Utba bin Rabi'a, Shaiba bin Rabi'a. 'Uqba bin Abi Mu'ait 'Umaiya bin Khalaf (or Ubai bin Khalaf)." Later on I saw all of them killed during the battle of Badr and their bodies were thrown into a well except the body of Umaiya or Ubai, because he was a fat person, and when he was pulled, the parts of his body got separated before he was thrown into the well. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 409)


Narrated 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud:

From Sad bin Mu'adh: Sad bin Mu'adh was an intimate friend of Umaiya bin Khalaf and whenever Umaiya passed through Medina, he used to stay with Sad, and whenever Sad went to Mecca, he used to stay with Umaiya. When Allah's Apostle arrived at Medina, Sa'd went to perform 'Umra and stayed at Umaiya's home in Mecca. He said to Umaiya, "Tell me of a time when (the Mosque) is empty so that I may be able to perform Tawaf around the Ka'ba." So Umaiya went with him about midday. Abu Jahl met them and said, "O Abu Safwan! Who is this man accompanying you?" He said, "He is Sad." Abu Jahl addressed Sad saying, "I see you wandering about safely in Mecca in spite of the fact that you have given shelter to the people who have changed their religion (i.e. became Muslims) and have claimed that you will help them and support them. By Allah, if you were not in the company of Abu Safwan, you would not be able to go your family safely." Sad, raising his voice, said to him, "By Allah, if you should stop me from doing this (i.e. performing Tawaf) I would certainly prevent you from something which is more valuable for you, that is, your passage through Medina." On this, Umaiya said to him, "O Sad do not raise your voice before Abu-l-Hakam, the chief of the people of the Valley (of Mecca)." Sad said, "O Umaiya, stop that! By Allah, I HAVE HEARD ALLAH’S APOSTLE PREDICTING THAT THE MUSLIMS WILL KILL YOU." Umaiya asked, "In Mecca?" Sad said, "I do not know." Umaiya was greatly scared by that news.

When Umaiya returned to his family, he said to his wife, "O Um Safwan! Don't you know what Sad told me? "She said, "What has he told you?" He replied, "He claims that MUHAMMAD HAS INFORMED THEM (i.e. companions) THAT THEY WILL KILL ME. I asked him, 'In Mecca?' He replied, 'I do not know." Then Umaiya added, "By Allah, I will never go out of Mecca." But when the day of (the Ghazwa of) Badr came, Abu Jahl called the people to war, saying, "Go and protect your caravan." But Umaiya disliked to go out (of Mecca). Abu Jahl came to him and said, "O Abu Safwan! If the people see you staying behind though you are the chief of the people of the Valley, then they will remain behind with you." Abu Jahl kept on urging him to go until he (i.e. Umaiya) said, "As you have forced me to change my mind, by Allah, I will buy the best camel in Mecca. Then Umaiya said (to his wife). "O Um Safwan, prepare what I need (for the journey)." She said to him, "O Abu Safwan! Have you forgotten what your Yathribi brother told you?" He said, "No, but I do not want to go with them but for a short distance." So when Umaiya went out, he used to tie his camel wherever he camped. He kept on doing that till Allah caused him to be killed at Badr. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 286)

Moreover, Zawadi and his source are being quite selective in their quotations since they failed to inform their readers that even though Muhammad initially forgave the Quraysh when he conquered Mecca he and his god later changed their minds and threatened to kill the pagans if they did not embrace Islam.

In fact, the following passage threatening the pagans to convert or be murdered was composed roughly a year after Muhammad had taken control of Mecca:

Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allah and His Messenger to those of the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah), with whom you made a treaty. So travel freely (O Mushrikun - see V.2:105) for four months (as you will) throughout the land, but know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah, and Allah will disgrace the disbelievers. And a declaration from Allah and His Messenger to mankind on the greatest day (the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah - the 12th month of Islamic calendar) that Allah is free from (all) obligations to the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) and so is His Messenger. So if you (Mushrikun) repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah. And give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful torment to those who disbelieve. Except those of the Mushrikun with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty to them to the end of their term. Surely Allah loves Al-Mattaqun (the pious - see V.2:2). Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. And if anyone of the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allah (the Qur'an), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not. How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2). How (can there be such a covenant with them) that when you are overpowered by them, they regard not the ties, either of kinship or of covenant with you? With (good words from) their mouths they please you, but their hearts are averse to you, and most of them are Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah). They have purchased with the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah a little gain, and they hindered men from His Way; evil indeed is that which they used to do. With regard to a believer, they respect not the ties, either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who are the transgressors. But if they repent, perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat) and give Zakat, then they are your brethren in religion. (In this way) We explain the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) in detail for a people who know. But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight (you) the leaders of disbelief (chiefs of Quraish - pagans of Makkah) - for surely their oaths are nothing to them - so that they may stop (evil actions). Will you not fight a people who have violated their oaths (pagans of Makkah) and intended to expel the Messenger, while they did attack you first? Do you fear them? Allah has more right that you should fear Him, if you are believers. Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people, And remove the anger of their (believers') hearts. Allah accepts the repentance of whom He wills. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. Do you think that you shall be left alone while Allah has not yet tested those among you who have striven hard and fought and have not taken Walijah [(Batanah - helpers, advisors and consultants from disbelievers, pagans, etc.) giving openly to them their secrets] besides Allah and His Messenger, and the believers. Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do. It is not for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah), to maintain the Mosques of Allah (i.e. to pray and worship Allah therein, to look after their cleanliness and their building, etc.), while they witness against their ownselves of disbelief. The works of such are in vain and in Fire shall they abide. The Mosques of Allah shall be maintained only by those who believe in Allah and the Last Day; perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat and fear none but Allah. It is they who are expected to be on true guidance. Do you consider the providing of drinking water to the pilgrims and the maintenance of Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah) as equal to the worth of those who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah? They are not equal before Allah. And Allah guides not those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers)… O you who believe! Take not for Auliya' (supporters and helpers) your fathers and your brothers if they prefer disbelief to Belief. And whoever of you does so, then he is one of the Zalimun (wrong-doers, etc.)… O you who believe (in Allah's Oneness and in His Messenger (Muhammad)! Verily, the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah, and in the Message of Muhammad) are Najasun (impure). So let them not come near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah) after this year, and if you fear poverty, Allah will enrich you if He will, out of His Bounty. Surely, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. S. 9:1-19, 23, 28 Hilali-Khan

Here, Allah gives Muhammad the right to break any of his pacts and covenants that he had made with the polytheists with the intention of forcing them to convert to Islam:

This is the Ayah of the Sword...

<But if they repent and perform the Salah, and give Zakah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.>

Abu Bakr As-Siddiq used this and other honorable Ayat as proof for fighting those who refrained from paying the Zakah. These Ayat allowed fighting people unless, and until, they embrace Islam and implement its rulings and obligations... In the two Sahihs, it is recorded that Ibn ‘Umar said that the Messenger of Allah said,

<I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, establish the prayer and pay Zakah.>

This honorable Ayah (9:5) was called the Ayah of the Sword, about which Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim said, "It abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolator, EVERY TREATY, AND EVERY TERM." Al-‘Awfi said that Ibn ‘Abbas commented: "No idolator had any more treaty or promise ever since Sura Bara’ah was revealed. The four months, in addition to, all peace treaties conducted before Bara’ah was revealed and announced had ended by the tenth of the month of Rabi’ Al-Akhir." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 9:5; capital and underline emphasis ours)

Another famous Muslim commentator, as-Suyuti, confirms Ibn Kathir’s interpretation:

This [Q. 9:5] is an Ayat of the Sword WHICH ABROGATES PARDON, TRUCE AND OVERLOOKING. (seize them) is used as evidence for the permission to take captives. (and besiege them) is permission for besieging and raiding and attacking by night. Ibn Abi Hatim reported that Abu 'Imran al-Jawfi said that ribat in the way of Allah is found in the words, "lie in wait for them on every road." (if they make tawba and establish the prayer and pay the zakat, let them go on their way) Repentance from shirk is not enough to let them go their way until they establish the prayer and pay the zakat. Ash-Shafi'i took this as a proof FOR KILLING ANYONE WHO ABANDONS THE PRAYER and fighting ANYONE WHO REFUSES TO PAY ZAKAT. Some use it as a proof that they are kafirun… (Aisha Bewley, Tafsir – Surat at-Tawba: Repentance; capital and underline emphasis ours)

And here is the approximate date of composition which helps us see that these verses were composed long after Muhammad had taken complete control of Mecca:

Discourses and Periods of Revelation

This Surah comprises three discourses:-

The first discourse (vv. 1-37), was revealed in Zil-Qa'adah A. H. 9 or thereabout. As the importance of the subject of the discourse required its declaration on the occasion of Haj the Holy Prophet dispatched Hadrat Ali to follow Hadrat Abu Bakr, who had already left for Makkah as leader of the Pilgrims to the Ka'abah. He instructed Hadrat Ali to deliver the discourse before the representatives of the different clans of Arabia so as to inform them of the new policy towards the mushriks

Historical Background

Now let us consider the historical background of the Surah. The series of events that have been discussed in this Surah took place after the Peace Treaty of Hudaibiyah. By that time, one-third of Arabia had come under the sway of Islam which had established itself as a powerful, well organized and civilized Islamic State. This Treaty afforded further opportunities to Islam to spread its influence in the comparatively peaceful atmosphere created by it. After this Treaty, two events took place, which led to very important results:

Conquest of Arabia

The first was the Conquest of Arabia. The Holy Prophet was able to send missions among different clans for the propagation of Islam. The result was that during the short period of two years, it became such a great power that it made the old order of ignorance' feel helpless before it. So much so that the zealous elements from among the Quraish were so exasperated that they broke the Treaty in order to encounter Islam in a decisive combat. But the Holy Prophet took prompt action after the breach so as not to allow them any opportunity to gather enough force for this. He made a sudden invasion on Makkah in the month of Ramadan in A. H. 8 and conquered it. Though this conquest broke the backbone of the order of ignorance, it made still another attack on Islam in the battle-field of Hunain, which proved to be its death-knell. The clans of Hawazin Thaqif, Naur, Jushm and others gathered their entire forces in the battle field in order to crush the reformative Revolution, but they utterly failed in their evil designs. The defeat of 'ignorance' at Hunain paved the way for making the whole of Arabia the 'Abode of Islam' (Dar-ul-Islam). The result was that hardly a year had passed after the Battle of Hunain, when the major portion of Arabia came within the fold of Islam and only a few upholders of the old order remained scattered over some corners of the country…

Problems of the Period

If we keep in view the preceding background, we can easily find out the problems that were confronting the Community at that time. They were:

1. to make the whole of Arabia a perfect Dar-ul-Islam,

2. to extend the influence of Islam to the adjoining countries,

3. to crush the mischiefs of the hypocrites, and

4. to prepare the Muslims for Jihad against the non- Muslim world.

1. Now that the administration of the whole of Arabia had come in the hands of the Believers, and all the opposing powers had become helpless, it was necessary to make a clear declaration of that policy which was to be adopted to make her a perfect Dar-ul-Islam. Therefore the following measures were adopted:

1. A clear declaration was made that all the treaties with the mushriks were abolished and the Muslims would be released from the treaty obligations with them after a respite of four months.(vv. 1-3). This declaration was necessary for uprooting completely the system of life based on shirk and to make Arabia exclusively the center of Islam so that it should not in any way interfere with the spirit of Islam nor become an internal danger for it.

2. A decree was issued that the guardianship of the Ka`abah, which held central position in all the affairs of Arabia, should be wrested from the mushriks and placed permanently in the hands of the Believers, (vv. 12-18) that all the customs and practices of the shirk of the era of 'ignorance' should be forcibly abolished: that the mushriks should not be allowed even to come near the "House" (v. 28). This was to eradicate every trace of shirk from the "House" that was dedicated exclusively to the worship of Allah.

3. The evil practice of Nasi, by which they used to tamper with the sacred months in the days of 'ignorance', was forbidden as an act of kufr (v. 37). This was also to serve as an example to the Muslims for eradicating every vestige of the customs of ignorance from the life of Arabia (and afterwards from the lives of the Muslims everywhere). (Syed Abu-Ala' Maududi's Chapter Introductions to the Qur'an; underline emphasis ours)


… The first part of this honorable Surah was revealed to the Messenger of Allah when he returned from the battle of Tabuk, during the Hajj season, which the Prophet thought about attending. But he remembered that the idolators would still attend that Hajj, as was usual in past years, and that they perform Tawaf around the House while naked. He disliked to associate with them and sent Abu Bakr As-Siddiq to lead Hajj that year and show the people their rituals, commanding him to inform the idolators that they would not be allowed to participate in Hajj after that season. He commanded him to proclaim...

<Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allah and His Messenger…>, to the people. When Abu Bakr had left, the Messenger sent `Ali bin Abu Talib to be the one to deliver this news to the idolators on behalf of the Messenger, for he was the Messenger's cousin. We will mention this story later. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q. 9:1-2; bold emphasis ours)

The pagans posed no serious threat to Muhammad since he had already subjected them to his rule. Yet it wasn’t enough for Muhammad that the disbelievers were under his control, he had to force them to become Muslims. Otherwise he would have them brutally murdered if they refused.

Hence, this clearly proves that Muhammad had every intention in literally slaughtering and murdering the Meccans had they not converted due to duress and fear.

What makes this rather unfortunate is that Zawadi knows full well that these verses warning the polytheists of impending massacre were composed sometime after the pagans of Mecca had already surrendered to Muhammad. And yet Zawadi deliberately withheld this information from his readers in order to portray Muhammad in the best possible manner while depicting his enemies in the worst imaginable way. Such deception and dishonesty is truly reprehensible and exposes the true origin of the teachings of Islam.

May the Triune God have mercy on Muslims such as Zawadi by bringing them out of the deception of Islam and into the glorious light of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

We now come to the conclusion of this part of our refutation to Zawadi’s distortion of truth. Lord Jesus willing, the rest of our response to Zawadi’s smokescreens should be appearing soon.