Rebuttal to Silas Article THE DEATH OF MUHAMMAD By Sami Zaatari answering-islam.org/Silas/mo-death.htm Missionary writer of Answering-Islam has written an article about the death of the prophet Muhammad, his article much like his other works fall in on itself, and I hope all the readers stay tuned till the end, when you shall see Silas refutes himself in his own article! With that said we now proceed to Silas article. He Wrote INTRODUCTION Muhammad died in 632 A.D. He died as a result of being poisoned following his attack upon and conquest of the Jewish settlement of Khaibar. About 2 month before his attack on Khaibar Muhammad failed in an attempt to go to Mecca. This failure resulted in the Treaty of Hudaybiyya with the Meccans. He returned humiliated in the eyes of the Meccans and in the minds of his people. To lift their defeated spirit, Muhammad told his followers that the events at Hudaybiyya were really a victory. In fact, another convenient revelation was given to Muhammad as proof that it really was a victory (Sura 48:1). However, Allah was not able to deliver the Meccans goods as booty, so Muhammad told his followers that they were going to attack and plunder the weaker Jewish settlement of Khaibar. My Response Silas blunders start early on, something quite common. He claims the prophet received a convenient revelation during the bad time, however so, this convenient revelation proved to be a true message, and a message only God could have known at the time. The treaty of Hudaybiyya did look like a loss for the Muslims, but however so, Allah plans best, and Allah told the prophet Muhammad it was a victory for him and the Muslims. And what a great victory, within 2 years the prophet Muhammad returned to Makkah, with 10,000 Muslim men, and took Makkah over with ease. The Quraysh gave up without a fight, and most of them accepted Islam. So Silas, would you care to comment on how this verse given to the prophet came to pass in just 2 years showing it was correct? He Wrote About 6 weeks later Muhammad led his army and attacked the Jews while they were on their way to work on their date palms. Khaibar was a settlement defended by a number of forts spread apart from each other. One by one Muhammads army took the forts. Finally, the last few surrendered to him. Muhammad had several of the leaders of the Jewish settlement beheaded, one leader (Kinana) was tortured to reveal where buried treasure was hidden. Then when Kinana was near death, Muhammad commanded that he be beheaded. Many of the women and children were enslaved. Muhammad even took the most beautiful woman for himself and married her (Safiyah). My Response Silas commits several blunders; let us check these blunders out, starting with Kinana: Many anti Islamics have used this incident of the torture of Kinana to attack the integrity of the Prophet. When I first read about it, I myself was quite shocked that the Prophet would torture some one just because of some treasure. Indeed Islam teaches us that treatment of the prisoners of war is a must. For the evidence you can read Now back to the Kinana issue. Actually the source of this story is invalid. Not because the source is weak, but because there is no source! Having left Medina and settled at Khaibar, the Banu Nadir started hatching a wide-spread conspiracy against Islam. Their leaders, Sallam Ibn Abi-al Huqauaiq, Huyayy Ibn Akhtab, Kinana al-Rabi and others came to Mecca, met the Quraish and told them that Islam could be destroyed. (Allama Shibli NuMani, Sirat-Un-Nabi, volume II, p 106) This goes to show that Kinana was a war criminal. Lets read on... While describing the battle of Khaibar, the history writers have committed a serious blunder in reporting a totally baseless report, which has become a common place. It is said that the Prophet ( Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had granted amnesty to the Jews on condition that they would not hide anything. When Kinana Ibn Rabi refused to give any clue to the hidden treasures, the Prophet ( peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) ordered Zubair to adopt stern measures to force a disclosure. Zubair branded his chest with a hot flint again and again, till he was on the point of death. At last he ordered Kinana to be put to death and all the Jews were made slaves. The whole truth in the story is that Kinana was put to death. But it was not for his refusal to give a clue to the hidden treasure. He was put to death because he had killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (also Muslima). Tabari had reported it in unambiguous words: Then the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) gave Kinana to Muhammad Ibn Maslama (Muslima), and he put him to death in retaliation of the murder of his own brother, Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima). In the rest of the report, both Tabari and Ibn Hisham have quoted it from Ibn Ishaq, but Ibn Ishaq does not name any narrator. Traditionalists, in books on Rijal, have explicitly stated that Ibn Ishaq used to borrow from the Jews stories concerning the battle of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). As Ibn Ishaq does not mention the name of any narrator whatsoever in this case, there is every likelihood of the story of having been passed on by the Jews. That a man should be tortured with burns on his chest by the sparks of a flint is too heinous a deed for a Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) who had earned for himself the title of Rahmalil Alamin (Mercy for all the worlds). After all, did he not let the woman who had sought to poison him go scot free? Who would expect such a soul to order human body to be so burnt for the sake of a few coins. As a matter of fact, Kinana Ibn Rabi Ibn al-Huquaiq had been granted his life on the condition that he would never break faith or make false statements. He had also given his word, according to one of the reports, that if he did anything to the contrary, he could be put to death. Kinana played false, and the immunity granted to him was withdrawn. He killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima) and had, therefore to suffer for it, as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari. (Allama Shibli NuMani, Sirat-Un-Nabi, volume II, p 173-174) As we can see there is no evidence what so ever for this story of Kinana because there is no narration or source given. It was contrary to the teachings of the Quran and the Prophets character. Therefore, Christians have to stop using this argument against the glorious Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). (Bassam Zawadis article Rebuttal to Silass Article MUHAMMAD AND THE DEATH OF KINANA) Now as to Saffiya: Many anti Islamics attack the marriage of Prophet Muhammad to Safiyyah. They claim that the Prophet was brutal and unfair in marrying Safiyyah. This article is not for giving a biography of Safiyyah. This articles only purpose is to show that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the Prophets marriage to Safiyyah. This article is only providing sources that may be beneficial for the Muslims. If any Muslim happens to come across any anti Islamic site which criticizes the Prophets marriage to Safiyyah, then you should find the material in this article to be very useful. I have collected information from different sources and they have been all referenced appropriately. The article will be divided into sections:- · Safiyyahs Attitude Towards The Prophet · Safiyyahs Character · The Prophets Marriage to Safiyyah and Its Wisdom · The Prophets Attitude Towards Safiyyah Safiyyahs Attitude Towards The Prophet The Prophet acknowledged the honesty of Safiyyah and what a great acknowledgement it was as it came from the most honest person on earth. Zayd ibn Aslam said, When the Prophet was so sick and on the verge of death his wives gathered around him. Safiyyah bint Huyayyay said, O Messenger of Allah, by Allah, I would like to be in your place. Hearing her utterance, the Prophets wives winked at her. The Prophet saw them and said, Rinse your mouths. They said, For what, Messenger of Allah? He said, For your winking at her, by Allah, she is telling the truth. (Ibn Sad, Tabaqat, vol. 8, p.101, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.175) Just see how much Safiyyah loved the Prophet. Here is Umm al- Muminin, Safiyyah, relates those moments when she hated the Prophet for killing her father and her ex-husband. The Prophet apologized to her saying, Your father charged the Arabs against me and committed heinous act, he apologized to the extent that made Safiyyah get rid of her bitterness against the Prophet. (Al-Bayhaqi, Dalail an-Nubuwwah, vol. 4, p. 230, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.166) Yes, indeed Safiyyah was angry at the Prophet at first but she forgave him later on. This is mainly due to the fact that she always knew that Muhammad was indeed a Prophet. Saffiyah says, I was my fathers and my uncles favorite child. When the Messenger of Allah came to Madinah and stayed at Quba, my parents went to him at night and when they looked disconcerted and worn out. I received them cheerfully but to my surprise no one of them turned to me. They were so grieved that they did not feel my presence. I heard my uncle, Abu Yasir, saying to my father, Is it really him? He said, Yes, by Allah. My uncle said: Can you recognize him and confirm this? He said, Yes. My uncle said, How do you feel towards him? He said, By Allah I shall be his enemy as long as I live. (Ibn Hisham, As-Sirah an-Nabawiyyah, vol. 2, pp. 257-258, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.162) The story above illustrates Safiyyahs awareness and intelligence. It also shows that the Jews had known of the Prophets prophethood, and knew him as well as they knew their children. Nevertheless they harbored feelings of hatred and bitterness for Islam and for the Prophet. The story in addition to this shows the great enmity and hatred that Huyayy felt against the Messenger of Allah. Safiyyah did not inherit anything from her father because Allah made her heart ready for Islam and prepared her soul for faith. (Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.162-163) More regarding the importance of this story... Taken from The significance of this conversation is evident when we recall that in the Torah for the Jews, it was written that a Prophet would come who would lead those who followed him to victory. Indeed before the Prophet Muhammad came to Madinah, the Jews used to threaten the idol worshippers of Yathrib, as it was then called, that when the next Prophet came to the believers were going to exterminate them, just as the Jews had exterminated other tribes who refused to worship God in the past. As in any case, of the Prophet Jesus, who had been clearly described in the Torah - but rejected by many of the Jews when he actually came - the next and last Prophet was accurately described in the Torah, which also contained signs by which the Jews could easily recognize him. Thus Kab al-Ahbar, one of the Jews of that time who embraced Islam, relates that this Prophet is described in the Torah.... To know a little bit more about Kab Al Ahbar read this link Back to the article... It was was thanks to these descriptions in the Torah, that the most learned rabbi of the Jews, Abdullah ibn Salam, had embraced Islam on seeing Muhammad and it was because of these descriptions that Huyayy ibn Akhtab was also able to recognize him. Huyayy, like most of the other Jews, was deeply disappointed that the last Prophet was a descendant of Ismail and not Ishaq, since the Jews of that time claimed exclusive descent from Ishaq, through the twelve sons of his son Yaqub, from whom the twelve tribes of Israel had originated. Not only did Huyayy resent the fact that the last Prophet had appeared amongst the Arabs, but also he did nto want to lose his position of power and leadership over his people. It was for these reasons that Huyayy secretly decided to oppose and fight the Prophet Muhammad while...... Although Safiyya was Huyayys daughter, she had a pure heart and had always wanted to worship her creator and Lord, the One who had sent Musa, to whom she was related, and Isa, and finally Muhammad, may Allah be pleased with all of them. Thus as soon as the opportunity arose, not only to follow the last Prophet, but also to be married with him, she took it. Safiyyah moved to the house of the Prophet. He loved, appreciated and honored her to the extent that he made her say, I have never seen a good-natured person as the Messenger of Allah. (Abu Yala al-Mawsili, Musnad, vol. 13, p. 38, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.172) Safiyyahs Character Abd Allah ibn Ubaydah said, A group of people gathered in the room of Safiyyah, a wife of the Prophet. They remembered Allah, recited the Quran and prostrated. Saffiyah called them saying, You prostrated and recited the Quran but where is your weeping (out of fearing Allah)? (Abu Nuaym al Asbahani, Hilyat al-Awliya, vol. 2, p. 55, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.177) This shows how much of a sincere worshipper to God Safiyyah was. Taken from She still underwent difficulties after the death of the Prophet. Once a slavegirl she owned went to the Amir Al Muminin Umar and asked, Amir al Muminin! Saiffya loves the Sabbath and maintains ties with the Jews! Umar asked Safiyya about that and she said, I have not loved the Sabbath since Allah replaced it with Friday for me, and I only maintain ties with those Jews to whom I am related by kinship. She asked her slavegirl what had possessed her to carries lie to Umar and the girl replied, Shaitan! Safiyya said, Go, you are free. This shows and proves that Safiyyah remained a loyal Muslim even after the Prophets death. Safiyyah established a warm and sympathetic relation with the Prophets household. She presented Fatimah az-Zahra a gift of jewels expressing her affection to her, and she also gave some of the Prophets wives gifts from her jewels that she brought with her from Khaybar. (Ibn Sad, Tabaqat, vol.8, p.100, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.172) Safiyyah was a humble worshiper and a pious believer. About her ibn Kathir said, She was one of the best women in her worship, piousness, ascetism, devoutness, and charity. (Ibn Kathir, Al-Bidayah wa an-Nihayah, vol. 8, p. 47, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.177) Safiyyah was a very charitable and generous woman. She used to give out and spend whatever she had for the sake of Allah to the extent that she gave out a house that she had when she was still alive. (Ibn Sad, Tabaqat, vol. 8, p. 102, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.178) The Prophets Marriage to Safiyyah and Its Wisdom As for the accusation that Safiyyah was coerced into marriage or taken advantage of, as alleged by a known Islamophobic, this claim has no basis at all. It is known that Safiyyah(R) remained loyal to the Prophet until he passed away. (An account of how Safiyyahs loyalty was affirmed by the Prophet(P) himself is recorded in Muhammad Husayn Haykal, op. cit., p. 374, of which an online document can be found, Cited in ) We have in fact the Prophet(P) making the following offer to her, as recorded by Martin Lings: He [the Prophet Muhammad - Ed.] then told Safiyyah that he was prepared to set her free, and he offered her the choice between remaining a Jewess and returning to her people or entering Islam and becoming his wife. I choose God and His Messenger, she said; and they were married at the first halt on the homeward march. (Martin Lings, Muhammad: His Life Based On The Earliest Sources (George Allen & Unwin, 1983), p. 269, Cited in ) The marriage to Safiyyah(R) has a political significance as well, as it helps to reduce hostilities and cement alliances. John L. Esposito notes that As was customary for Arab chiefs, many were political marriages to cement alliances. Others were marriages to the widows of his companions who had fallen in combat and were in need of protection. (John L. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, pp. 19-20, Cited in ) This significant act of marrying Safiyyah(R) was indeed a great honour for her, for this not only preserved her dignity, it also prevented her from becoming a slave. Haykal notes that: The Prophet granted her freedom and then married her, following the examples of great conquerors who married the daughters and wives of the kings whom they had conquered, partly in order to alleviate their tragedy and partly to preserve their dignity. (Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad (North American Trust Publications, 1976), p. 373, Cited in ) With marrying Safiyyah, the Prophet aimed at ending the enmity and hostility adopted by the Jews against him and against Islam, all the way long, but alas they went on with their hatred for Islam and for the Prophet simply because it was their natural disposition to be malicious and stubborn. ( See Muhammad M. as-Sawwaf, Zawjat ar-Rasul at-Tahirat wa Hikmat Tadudihinn, pp. 76-79, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.168) The Prophets Attitude Towards Safiyyah Indeed, when Bilal ibn Rabah(R), a Companion of the Prophet, brought Safiyyah along with another Jewess before him(P) by passing through the Jews that were slain in the battle, Muhammad(P) personally chided Bilal and said Have you no compassion, Bilal, when you brought two women past their dead husbands? (A. Guillaume (trans.), The Life of Muhammad: A translation of Ibn Ishaqs Sirat Rasul Allah (Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 515, Cited in ) There was once a situation when Zaynab bint Jahsh and Safiyyah went with the Prophet on one of his travels and the camel of Safiyyah fell sick. The Prophet said to Zaynab, The camel of Safiyyah has fallen sick, what about giving her one of your camels? She said, Never should I give it to such a Jewish woman. The Prophet became angry with her and he did not approach her for two months. (Ahmad, vol. 6, pp. 336-337, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.173) The Prophet used to treat Safiyyah with courteousness, gentleness and affection. Safiyyah said, The Messenger of Allah went to Hajj with his wives. On the way my camel knelt down for it was the weakest among all the other camels and so I wept. The Prophet came to me and wiped away my tears with his dress and hands. The more he asked me not to weep the more I went on weeping. (Ahmad, vol.6, p. 337, Cited in Muhammad Fathi Musad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, p.176) (Bassam Zawadis article Safiyyah, the Wife of Muhammad) He Wrote Some of Khaibars residents made a deal with Muhammad. Instead of enslaving them, which would leave the rich orchards of Khaibar to go untended and unproductive, the Jews would give Muhammad and the Muslims 1/2 of all of what they produced. Muhammad accepted the deal, with the stipulation that they could be expelled at his slightest whim. Years later, Umar expelled the last remaining Jews from Khaibar. Immediately following the conquest of Khaibar, a Jewish woman prepared a dinner for Muhammad and some of his men. Unknown to the Muslims was that she had put a poison into the lamb (some say goat) that was served at dinner. Muhammad ate some of the poisoned lamb and died as a result three years later. My Response Tell me what is this poison that kills a man THREE years later after taking it? Doesnt that sound strange to you? And also this poison was meant to have an immediate effect, not a long term effect and then killing the person, the poison was meant to kill the person on the spot. He Wrote PART A - THE POISONING OF MUHAMMAD A1 From Bukharis Hadith 3.786: Narrated Anas bin Malik: A Jewess brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, Shall we kill her? He said, No. I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of Allahs Apostle. A2 From Bukharis Hadith 4.394: Narrated Abu Huraira: When Khaibar was conquered, a roasted poisoned sheep was presented to the Prophet as a gift (by the Jews). The Prophet ordered, Let all the Jews who have been here, be assembled before me. The Jews were collected and the Prophet said (to them), I am going to ask you a question. Will you tell the truth? They said, Yes. The Prophet asked, Who is your father? They replied, So-and-so. He said, You have told a lie; your father is so-and-so. They said, You are right. He said, Will you now tell me the truth, if I ask you about something? They replied, Yes, O Abu Al-Qasim; and if we should tell a lie, you can realize our lie as you have done regarding our father. On that he asked, Who are the people of the (Hell) Fire? They said, We shall remain in the (Hell) Fire for a short period, and after that you will replace us. The Prophet said, You may be cursed and humiliated in it! By Allah, we shall never replace you in it. Then he asked, Will you now tell me the truth if I ask you a question? They said, Yes, O Abu Al-Qasim. He asked, Have you poisoned this sheep? They said, Yes. He asked, What made you do so? They said, We wanted to know if you were a liar in which case we would get rid of you, and if you are a prophet then the poison would not harm you. A3 From Ibn Sad page 249: Verily a Jewish woman presented poisoned (meat of) a she goat to the apostle of Allah. He took a piece form it, put it into his mouth, chewed it and threw it away. Then he said to the Companions: Halt! Verily, its leg tells me that it is poisoned. Then he sent for the Jewish woman and asked her; What induced you to do what you have done? She replied, I wanted to know if you are true; in that case Allah will surely inform you, and if you are a liar I shall relieve the people of you. A4 From Ibn Sad page 249: [different narrator] The apostle of Allah and his companions ate from it. It (goat) said: I am poisoned. He [Muhammad] said to his Companions, Hold you hands! because it has informed me that it is poisoned! They withdrew their hands, but Bishr Ibn al-Bara expired. The apostle of Allah sent for her (Jewess) and asked her, What induced you to do what you have done? She replied, I wanted to know if you are a prophet, in that case it will not harm you and if you are a king, I shall relieve the people of you. He gave orders and she was put to death. [SEE NOTE 1] A5 From Ibn Sad page 250: [different narrator] Verily a woman of the Jews of Khaibar presented poisoned (meat of) goat to the apostle of Allah. The he recognized that it was poisoned, so he sent for her and asked her, What induced you to do what you have done? She replied, I thought if you are a prophet, Allah will inform you, and if you are a pretender, I shall relieve people of you. When the apostle of Allah felt sick, he got himself cupped. [SEE NOTE 2] A6 From Ibn Sad pages 251, 252: [different narrator] ....When the apostle of Allah conquered Khaibar and he had peace of mind, Zaynab Bint al-Harith the brother of Marhab, who was the spouse of Sallam Ibn Mishkam, inquired, Which part of the goat is liked by Muhammad? They said, The foreleg. Then she slaughtered one from her goats and roasted it (the meat). Then she wanted a poison which could not fail. .... The apostle of Allah took the foreleg, a piece of which he put into his mouth. Bishr took another bone and put it into his mouth. When the apostle of Allah ate one morsel of it Bishr ate his and other people also ate from it. Then the apostle of Allah said, Hold back your hands! because this foreleg; ...informed me that it is poisoned. Thereupon Bishr said, By Him who has made you great! I discovered it from the morsel I took. Nothing prevented me from emitting it out, but the idea that I did not like to make your food unrelishing. When you had eaten what was in your mouth I did not like to save my life after yours, and I also thought you would not have eaten it if there was something wrong. Bishr did not rise form his seat but his color changed to that of taylsan (a green cloth)..........The apostle of Allah sent for Zaynab and said to her, What induced you to do what you have done? She replied, You have done to my people what you have done. You have killed my father, my uncle and my husband, so I said to myself, If you are a prophet, the foreleg will inform you; and others have said, If you are a king we will get rid of you....... The apostle of Allah lived after this three years till in consequence of his pain he passed away. During his illness he used to say, I did not cease to find the effect of the (poisoned) morsel, I took at Khaibar and I suffered several times (from its effect) but now I feel the hour has come of the cutting of my jugular vein. A7 From Tabari Volume 8, page 123, 124: When the messenger of God rested from his labor, Zaynab bt. al-Harith, the wife of Sallam b. Mishkam, served him a roast sheep. She had asked what part of the sheep the messenger of God liked best and was told that it was the foreleg. So she loaded that part with poison, and she poisoned the rest of the sheep too. Then she brought it. When she set it before the messenger of God, he took the foreleg and chewed a bit of it, but he did not swallow it. With him was Bishr b. al-Bara b. Marur, who, like the messenger of God, took some of it; Bishr, however, swallowed it, while the messenger of God spat it out saying, This bone informs me that it has been poisoned. He asked, What led you to do this? She said: How you have afflicted my people is not hidden from you. So I said, If he is a prophet, he will be informed; but if he is a king, I shall be rid of him. The prophet forgave her. Bishr died of the food he had eaten. A8 From Tabari Volume 8, page 124: [different narrator] The messenger of God said during the illness from which he died - the mother of Bishr had come in to visit him - Umm Bishr, at this very moment I feel my aorta being severed because of the food I ate with your son at Khaybar. [See NOTE 3] My Response Already note the problems with Silas conclusion, the hadiths he quotes refute his position! Note: From Tabari Volume 8, page 123, 124: When the messenger of God rested from his labor, Zaynab bt. al-Harith, the wife of Sallam b. Mishkam, served him a roast sheep. She had asked what part of the sheep the messenger of God liked best and was told that it was the foreleg. So she loaded that part with poison, and she poisoned the rest of the sheep too. Then she brought it. When she set it before the messenger of God, he took the foreleg and chewed a bit of it, but he did not swallow it. With him was Bishr b. al-Bara b. Marur, who, like the messenger of God, took some of it; Bishr, however, swallowed it, while the messenger of God spat it out saying, This bone informs me that it has been poisoned. He asked, What led you to do this? She said: How you have afflicted my people is not hidden from you. So I said, If he is a prophet, he will be informed; but if he is a king, I shall be rid of him. The prophet forgave her. Bishr died of the food he had eaten. Note the first problem Silas has, the companion of the prophet who did eat from the poisoned lamb died when he ate the lamb, this shows the poison was meant to have an immediate affect, to kill the person on the spot, not to have a long term effect on the person. That is not the only problem: From Bukharis Hadith 4.394: Narrated Abu Huraira: When Khaibar was conquered, a roasted poisoned sheep was presented to the Prophet as a gift (by the Jews). The Prophet ordered, Let all the Jews who have been here, be assembled before me. The Jews were collected and the Prophet said (to them), I am going to ask you a question. Will you tell the truth? They said, Yes. The Prophet asked, Who is your father? They replied, So-and-so. He said, You have told a lie; your father is so-and-so. They said, You are right. He said, Will you now tell me the truth, if I ask you about something? They replied, Yes, O Abu Al-Qasim; and if we should tell a lie, you can realize our lie as you have done regarding our father. On that he asked, Who are the people of the (Hell) Fire? They said, We shall remain in the (Hell) Fire for a short period, and after that you will replace us. The Prophet said, You may be cursed and humiliated in it! By Allah, we shall never replace you in it. Then he asked, Will you now tell me the truth if I ask you a question? They said, Yes, O Abu Al-Qasim. He asked, Have you poisoned this sheep? They said, Yes. He asked, What made you do so? They said, We wanted to know if you were a liar in which case we would get rid of you, and if you are a prophet then the poison would not harm you. Note when the prophets asks them why they poisoned the lamb, they reply by saying they did it to see if he was a true prophet, had he been a true prophet the poison would not HARM HIM. Now by this, the Jews obviously meant if he was a prophet, then the poison would not kill him, since that was the effect it had on the person who ate from it, and as we see, the poison had no such effect on the prophet; the prophet survived from the poison and did not die from it. Thus under the Jews own criteria, the prophet Muhammad was proven to be a true prophet! There is still another problem for Silas: From Ibn Sad page 249: Verily a Jewish woman presented poisoned (meat of) a she goat to the apostle of Allah. He took a piece form it, put it into his mouth, chewed it and threw it away. Then he said to the Companions: Halt! Verily, its leg tells me that it is poisoned. Then he sent for the Jewish woman and asked her; What induced you to do what you have done? She replied, I wanted to know if you are true; in that case Allah will surely inform you, and if you are a liar I shall relieve the people of you. Note the Jewish lady says if he is a true prophet then God would tell him, as we see, the prophet got a sign that the lamb was poisoned when he shouted: Halt! Verily, its leg tells me that it is poisoned Once the prophet got this sign, he immediately spat the poisoned lamb out, which ultimately saved his life: From Tabari Volume 8, page 123, 124: When the messenger of God rested from his labor, Zaynab bt. al-Harith, the wife of Sallam b. Mishkam, served him a roast sheep. She had asked what part of the sheep the messenger of God liked best and was told that it was the foreleg. So she loaded that part with poison, and she poisoned the rest of the sheep too. Then she brought it. When she set it before the messenger of God, he took the foreleg and chewed a bit of it, but he did not swallow it. With him was Bishr b. al-Bara b. Marur, who, like the messenger of God, took some of it; Bishr, however, swallowed it, while the messenger of God spat it out saying, This bone informs me that it has been poisoned. He asked, What led you to do this? She said: How you have afflicted my people is not hidden from you. So I said, If he is a prophet, he will be informed; but if he is a king, I shall be rid of him. The prophet forgave her. Bishr died of the food he had eaten. Note how it says Bishr swallowed it, while the prophet Muhammad spat it out, showing he did not swallow it. Had the prophet swallowed from it, he would have surely been killed, but he received a miraculous sign warning him from the poisoned lamb. However so, he had still put some of the lamb in his mouth, so he had small effects of the poison, but not the full intended harm which was wanted, which was for him to die. Hence what we have here is: 1- The poison was meant to kill on impact, not a long term killing, the prophet was not killed on impact, unlike his companion Bishr who was. This proves the poison did not kill him. 2- The poison would not harm Muhammad if he was true prophet, the harm that was intended on him was to kill him, this harm did not come about, so he was not harmed in the way the Jews had planned, therefore under their criteria he was a true prophet. 3- The Jews said God would have warned Muhammad if he was a true prophet, as we see, the prophet was warned, and as a result spat the piece of lamb out and not swallowing it, which saved his life! So hence the very source Silas quotes from refutes his entire argument, how ironic. However so stay reading, as you will see Silas completely refutes himself near the end when asking a question to the Muslims. He Wrote SUMMARY OF THE SOURCES Muhammad attacked Khaibar. He destroyed, tortured, murdered, plundered, and enslaved many people (ref Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, volume 2, page 134, 136, 137). They were not preparing to attack him. A Jewish woman, whose family had been wiped out by Muhammad, put poison into a lamb and fed it to Muhammad and the other Muslims. Muhammad ingested some of the poisoned lamb and began to feel its effects. He died three years later as a result of the poisoning. My Response Dont worry, part 2 of this rebuttal will come out soon on the battle of Khaibar where you shall be further exposed. The Jewish lady poisoned the prophet, but it did not have the harm they sought, which was his death, God had protected the prophet Muhammad, and under their criteria this made him a true prophet. Silas also now makes a false dilemma, and a logical fallacy. Just because the prophet still felt the effects of the poison does not mean that was the cause of his death! What kind of silliness is that?! And again, the poison was meant to have an immediate effect, not a long term effect where it would eventually kill you, the proof of this is when the prophets companion ate of the poisoned lamb he was killed by it. So Silas has no case, the sources he quoted from refuted his case, but off course typical of the Answering-Islam missionaries is to quote Islamic sources and make conclusions not found in those texts. He Wrote DISCUSSION What needs to be investigated here are the circumstances of Muhammads death. The Jews were planning to murder him. The Jews believed that a real prophet would be forewarned of their deed but an impostor wouldnt be warned by God. The Muslims also believed this; the other Muslim who died said that he didnt think Muhammad would eat of something that was poisoned (see quote in A6). My Response As we saw, under the Jews criteria the prophet Muhammad was a true prophet. Secondly, who really cares what the Jews thought? As we shall shortly see Silas argument backfires against his own faith, as usual no consistency from our Christian opponents. Secondly, the sources Silas quotes from shows the prophet spat the food out after receiving a miraculous sign. He Wrote The Jews were right, Muhammad did eat of the poison, and did die from it. They proved, according to their test, that Muhammad was not a prophet. As they said (quote A2): We wanted to know if you were a liar in which case we would get rid of you, and if you are a prophet then the poison would not harm you. My Response Then I guess the Jews are also correct about Jesus, that he is an imposter, a false messiah, which is why he was killed and could not save himself, according to Silas logic, this makes those Jews correct, as the Bible says: Matthew 27:33-50 33 And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull, 34 They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. 35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots. 36 And sitting down they watched him there; 37 And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS. 38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left. 39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, 40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross. 41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, 42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. 43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God. 44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth. 45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour. 46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? 47 Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias. 48 And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink. 49 The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him. 50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. So note these Jews came up to Jesus when he was on the cross, and they mocked him, and told him if he is the son of God, and king of Israel, and could save others then let him save himself, since Jesus died then this means he was a fake according to them! And using Silas logic this means the Jews are correct and Jesus is a fake! Very nice Silas, I love it when Christian apologists dig their own hole with their inconsistent arguments. See folks, this is basically what Answering-Islam is all about, please do not be deceived into thinking that these guys are scholars or are very smart people who know their stuff on Islam and their own faith. Let us further expose Silas shallow chain of argument, the NT makes it clear that other prophets were also killed: Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! So note, the Jews had already killed other prophets, using Silas logic, those prophets whom the Jews killed were also all fakes, because I am sure the Jews wouldnt have killed them if they believed they were true prophets now would they? So Silas own methodology has completely exposed him, however so his destruction does not end there, no, he still refutes himself at the end in such a nice way. He Wrote Muhammad realized that he was dying, ceased praying for healing (quote C4), and claimed that Allah had given him a choice to going to Paradise, or living on earth. Muhammad said he then wanted to go to Paradise. Knowing the game was up, he made the best out of a failed situation. My Response Note the coward is afraid to quote the hadith, none the less, as Silas said, the prophet Muhammad was given the choice of this world or the hereafter, he chose the hereafter. However so, this point he makes shall refute him, when he asks a question to the Muslims, which is quite hilarious and shows how little Answering-Islam really know. He Wrote 1) If Muhammad were a real prophet of God, why didnt he catch the poison before he ate it? My Response He spat the poisoned lamb out, and did not die from it. Secondly, for the sake of argument, what exactly would be wrong if the prophet died as a result of the poison? This would just make him a martyr of God, and add him to the list of prophets killed by the Jews! So perhaps Silas can enlighten us on how any of this disproves the prophet hood of Muhammad if he did die from the poisoning. He Wrote 2) If you believe that it was Gods will for Muhammad to have eaten the poison, along with Bishr, why then did Muhammad try to get well? Even Gabriel prayed for Muhammad to get better, but Allah didnt answer that prayer either. My Response The question makes no sense, Allah wills for the prophet to get poisoned, so why does Muhammad pray to get healed????? The prophet got sick, so off course he is still going to pray for Allah to heal him! Perhaps that was the purpose, for the prophet Muhammad to get sick and ask Allah for help, to show us how we should act when we are sick, by asking Allah for all help. Secondly, Silas is being inconsistent again! Let us expose Silas inconsistency, Silas as a Christian believes it was Gods and Jesus will for Jesus to die on the cross, if this was so, why did Jesus cry and plead for God to save him?! Why was Jesus so scared, why did Jesus tell his disciples to even buy swords! This exposes Silas inconsistency again. He Wrote 3) Why did Gabriel not know the will of Allah? Why would Gabriel pray if Allah had decided death? My Response This is probably one of the most stupid questions I have seen, why didnt Gabriel know Allahs will? Hmmmm, because no one knows what Allahs plans are! Are you that smart to be able to read Gods mind and plan? No one knows the will of God, Silas knows this. The rest of his questions are irrelevant and do nothing to prove his argument. He Wrote Muhammad was not a real prophet, he was a false prophet. He died as a result of eating poison that he didnt know about. The poisoned lamb spoke to him too late. Only when he realized he was dying did Muhammad spiritualize his suffering and coming death. Prior to that he tried to get well. My Response How is the prophet Muhammad a fake? Just say he did die from the poisoning, how does that make him a false prophet?! Using your logic, Jesus is a false messiah, and so were the other prophets who were killed, very good job. How does Jochen Katz even publish such rubbish? He Wrote Moses knew about his coming death (Deut 34:1-5). Jesus also knew of His future death (Mark 8:32, 32). Yet Muhammad was in the dark until he himself realized he was going to die. My Response As I said, Silas completely refutes himself at the end, and completes his own destruction. Note Silas claims Moses, and Jesus knew of their death, but the prophet Muhammad did not, it seems Silas has short term memory, or is purposely lying here, he himself stated: claimed that Allah had given him a choice to going to Paradise, or living on earth. Muhammad said he then wanted to go to Paradise So earlier Silas stated that the prophet Muhammad was given the choice to live, or go to heaven, how is that being in the dark? He had a choice to live or go to heaven, he chose heaven! So the prophet Muhammad knew very well that he was going to die, and unlike Moses and Jesus, the prophet had a choice! So how could Silas forget this? And make such a lie when he knows Islamic sources show the prophet Muhammad knew he was going to die when he made the choice to go to heaven rather than staying alive! Such deceit is inexcusable and simply exposes Answering-Islam, Silas, and his boss Jochen ?the joke Katz for publishing such blatant lies. Silas has completely humiliated himself, in summary he cause these problems: 1- Called Jesus a false messiah 2- Called many of the prophets of the OT fakes 3- Called Jesus a liar, since Jesus called those prophets true prophets, Silas calls them fakes, therefore making Jesus a liar. This brings this rebuttal to a close, as we have seen, Silas miserably failed in proving his argument, he ended up committing blasphemy and must now go repent to Jesus before he gets eternal damnation, but even if he repents to Jesus, he shall still be getting eternal damnation because Jesus is not God and not the one you repent to, he should repent to the one and true God ALLAH. AMEEN!
Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:42:30 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015