Mott1
King
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2006
- Messages
- 742
Salah-Al-Din said:You have simply listed all of the battles the Prophet (s) took part in. These were all legitimate Holy Wars (Jihad) that were fought to defend Muslims.
Only a complete ignoramus would bring this list forth as evidence of any wrongdoing on the Prophet's part. (I'm not saying you are an ignoramus, but whoever you copied and pasted it from.) These battles were fought by the State of Medinah against the Meccan Quraish who persecuted the Prophet (s) and his early followers. The minute the Prophet (s) declared the Message of Islam, the leaders of the Quraish began the process of persecuting the early Muslims. This is a fact that is known to anyone who has even an iota of knowledge about early Islamic history, which you obviously do not, or you simply wish to misguide or impress us with your copy-and-paste.
In fact, the Muslims had lived in Mecca, but their properties were confiscated and stolen by the Meccan Quraish who expelled many Muslims, beat and tortured yet others, economically boycotted the Muslims, stole their wealth, and eventually attempted to assassinate the Prophet (s) himself, who barely fled Mecca with his life. He (s) found refuge in Medinah, which was no match for the more powerful Mecca. Repeatedly the Meccans sought to conquer Medinah and destroy the nascent Islamic state, but with the Grace of Allah, the Muslims prevailed.
All of the wars you have mentioned were in this rivalry between (infidel) Mecca and (Muslim) Medinah, in which the former aggressed the latter.
You have mentioned the Battle of Qurayza. Let us talk about this then. There were many Jewish clans in Medinah, and overall the relationship between the Prophet (s) and them was cordial enough. They signed a mutual pact and treaty to help each other in battle and protect the State of Medinah.
However, one of the tribes (Banu Qurayza) betrayed the State of Medinah, broke the treaty, and committed high treason, by giving inside help to the enemy armies. The Muslims paid a steep price for this treachoury, and many Muslims lost their lives for this.
So after the Muslims and their Jewish allies barely managed to save the day, it was time to take punitive action against the traitors, the People of Qurayza. The Prophet (s) laid seige to this township. Any leader of any country would punish traitors and those guilty of high treason.
In fact, the Prophet (s) delegated the role of judging these people to Sad bin Mua'adh. The latter asked the men of the tribe--who by the way confessed to their crime--if they wanted to be punished by Islamic Law or Jewish Law. In other words, he gave them the choice: either accept Islamic Law for treason or Jewish Law for treason. These people did not realize that Islamic Law was much more forgiving than the harsh Torah, and they asked to be ruled by Jewish Law.
Based on Jewish Law, traitors were to be killed. And it was so. The traitors were put to death.
I see your parenthetical insertion is designed to make it look embarassing to the Muslims. As if the Muslims would check pubic hair...this is deciet on the part of whoever you copied and pasted from. Basically, those with *facial* hair were punished and those without were forgiven. The Arabs of that time (and even today) attribute manhood to facial hair. The beard has special significance in the Arab and Islamic custom.
Therefore, the Prophet (s) was so forgiving that he only punished the traitors who were adults, and he spared the minors, despite the fact that they had also engaged in treason to which they readily admitted. But this is the great code of Islam.
Take care, brother.
Brother Salah-Al-Din,
Unfortunately, as I am sure you are aware, we no longer have Ishaq's Original Sirat Rasul Allah as it is no longer in existence. Ibn Ishaq collected hadiths and arranged them in chronological order (basically making them into a biography of Muhammad) and this was called Sirat Rasul Allah. Tabari quoted some of Ishaq's work in his own hadith collection. However the Ishaq Manuscripts were all lost.
Hisham came along and decided to collect and 'redo' the book; but collected the only known surviving sources for it (from Tabari). By his own admission, Hisham censored much of it, added some of his own thoughts/writings etc. and released it as the abridged Sirat Rasul Allah.
Then Alfred Guillame comes along and takes Hisham's work, translates it into English, edits it some more and releases it as "The Life of Muhammad."
Any quotes from Guilliame's work, are second generation corruptions of the original Tabari text (Tabari >> Hisham >> Guillame).
The parenthetical insertion of 'pubes' was not of my own device, it is presented in the hadith Dawud one:
Dawud Book 38, Number 4390
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.
Now, can you please provide evidence for your claim that "those with *facial* hair were punished and those without were forgiven."
My intention was not to make it look "embarrasing" to Muslims, I was simply relating Muhammads history of violence. I find it very disturbing that you preceive the "insertion" of pubes as embarrasing to Muslims, however Muhammads barbaric actions do not embarrass you at all, in fact you find them all justified. That, my friend, is a tragedy. Does it matter whether the pubes or facial hair was examined? the outcome was the same, a genocidal massacre by a man who claimed to have "sublime morals" (Q68:4) "a good example to follow" (Q33:21). He referred to himself as "the mercy of God for all the worlds" (Q21:107).
You call me a "complete ingnoramous," such harsh words from such a nice guy. The list I presented was not to demonstrate the "wrongdoings" of Muhammad. If all the barbaric and horrific action attributed to him in the Quran and ahadith do not convince you of Muhammads wrongdoings then I know there is no amount of evidence that will. I presented the list to show the many battles that the prophet of Allah, the prophet of all times, participated in. You only succeed in fooling yourself by stating they were all defensive battles, one needs only to research the Quran and ahadiths objectively to achieve a different conclusion. Although I do agree with you that according to the Islamic doctrine they were all legitimate Holy Wars (Jihad).