Bassam Zawadi has responded
(*)
to my answer (*) to his challenge regarding the dissatisfaction
of Muhammads wives with their marriage situation. Let us see how well he did.
Muhammad as the Cause of His Wives Jealousy and Anguish
I had said that Zawadi would resort to discrediting Muhammads wives in order to
justify his prophets failure as a husband. Sure enough, Zawadi didnt
disappoint me since this is precisely what he does in his recent "rebuttal":
Shamoun in his article shows instances in which the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon
him) were jealous and sometimes disappointed with the Prophet (peace be upon him).
However, this is no way meets my challenge. Shamoun hastened to try to understand what I
was asking for. My challenge was for him to show that they were displeased in their
marriage in the sense that they wanted it to end and not displeased at certain times.
Spouses always have ups and downs and quarrel with each other but that does not mean that
they are displeased in their marriage. For conflicts do arise in marriages and any one who
is married will most likely tell you that this is so.
The Prophet (peace be upon him) was no different. That is the reason why he is such a
good example for us to follow. He was a human being that went through the same troubles in
life that others go through and we can learn from him how he dealt with it unlike taking a
"godman" as an example to follow and you can't relate to him because he is
nothing like you.
In the first place, Zawadis challenge wasnt for me to ONLY show that the
wives wanted to leave their husband; this is something he just made up in order to avoid
admitting that his challenge has been met. Rather, this is what he challenged me to prove:
If I were to do so, I could write over a dozen pages
showing narrations in which the Prophet's wives were pleased in their marriage and were
happy with Islam even after the Prophet's death. I challenge Shamoun to show otherwise. I
challenge Shamoun to show evidence that the wives wished that they had divorced the
Prophet OR WERE DISPLEASED IN THEIR MARRIAGE TO HIM. It is all assumptions
and mind games by Shamoun. That's all. Means absolutely nothing. (Emphasis ours)
The readers can see that Zawadi asked me to present evidence to either prove that
Muhammads spouses wanted to divorce him OR were not happy with their
marital situation. As any fair and open-minded reader can attest, I did meet the challenge
by providing plenty of documentation from primary Islamic sources proving that
Muhammads women were not at all pleased with their marital conditions.
Secondly, Muhammads marriage life is one of the strongest proofs that polygamy is
not the ideal situation for anyone, but rather monogamy is. Polygamous relations only add
to pain, strife and heartache, just as Muhammads marriages amply prove. Hence,
Muhammad is a great example of why a person should pursue monogamy over against polygamy.
Zawadi claims that the jealousy of Muhammads wives was absolutely normal and
appeals to Sarahs jealousy of Hagar to justify it!? He further says:
So as we see, it is perfectly understandable for women to be jealous as long as it
does not cross any illegal boundaries set by God...
He then proceeds to quote Muslims who say that womens jealousy should be
overlooked since it isnt a sin! He also mentions that Aishas jealousy
didnt stop her from talking kindly of her husband.
By raising the issue of jealousy not being a sin Zawadi is doing nothing more than to
attack a straw man since we were not discussing whether it was right or wrong for
Muhammads wives to be jealous. The challenge was to show whether Muhammads
wives were dissatisfied with their marital situation, and the data we presented clearly
shows that they were. It is rather apparent that by shifting the blame Zawadi is trying to
make light of a serious moral defect in Muhammad and his failure as a husband.
Yet Zawadi is doing nothing more than placing the cart before the horse, so to speak,
since there would have been no reason for any of Muhammads wives to be jealous had
Muhammad simply followed the pattern for marriage which God set from the beginning of
creation, namely, monogamy.
Zawadi needs to face the music and come to grips with the fact that Muhammad
was the cause of his wives jealousy and therefore the one to blame. As even one of
Zawadis own sources admits:
Anyway, we should learn from the above-mentioned
hadith that a Muslim woman should be moderate in her jealousy on her husband in all her
affairs as well. Moderation is a token of perfection of religion and mind. If jealousy
exceeds the limits of moderation, IT WILL BE AN ACCUSATION AGAINST HER HUSBAND. It may
kindle fire within the heart of the wife, and ignite the fire of discord and dissension
between spouses.
(Muhammad Fathi Mus'ad, The Wives of
the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, pp. 47)
Verily, jealousy comes as a result of a
woman's imagination THAT HER HUSBAND LOVES ANOTHER WOMAN MORE THAN HER. this is a natural
behavior that is usually committed by high virtuous women, not to mention the ordinary
ones. As we have mentioned before, when talking about Aisha' that a wife's jealousy is of
no harm so long as its reason is loving the husband and it does not exceed the limits of
moderation. (ibid. pp. 85) (Capital emphasis our own)
To provide a further illustration of Muhammad being the cause of his wives
anguish and jealousy, take the example of his love for his concubine Mariyah. It is no
secret that Muhammads spouses resented Mariyah both for her beauty and for giving
birth to Muhammads son in his old age. The jealousy was such that Aisha told her
husband that she saw no resemblance between father and son:
The Birth of Ibrahim, Muhammad's Son
Soon, Muhammad's loss was to be
compensated. Mariyah, his Coptic wife, gave birth to a son whom Muhammad called Ibrahim
after the ancestor father of the Arabs as well as of hanifism and Islam. Until that day,
and since the Archbishop of Alexandria had presented her to the Prophet, Mariyah had the
status of a slave. She did not enjoy the benefits of a living quarter by the mosque as did
the other wives of the Prophet, "the Mothers of Believers." Muhammad had
provided Mariyah with a second-story residence in one of the outskirts of Madinah, called
today Mashrabat Umm Ibrahim. Her house, which was surrounded with vineyards, was where
Muhammad used to visit her every now and then. He had chosen her for himself and gave her
sister Sirin to Hassan ibn Thabit. Muhammad did not expect to have any more children as
none of his wives except the late Khadijah had ever conceived, though some of them were
quite young and capable of bearing children. When Mariyah gave birth to Ibrahim, the event
brought to Muhammad, a man past sixty years of age, great joy and filled his heart with
reassurance and jubilation. By giving birth to a child, the status of Mariyah was raised
in the Prophet's esteem; he now looked upon her as a free wife, indeed, as one enjoying a
most favored position.
Jealousy of the Prophet's Wives
It was natural that this change would
incite no little jealousy among his other wives who continued to be barren. It was
also natural that the Prophet's esteem and affection for the newborn child and his
mother increased that jealousy. Moreover, Muhammad had liberally, rewarded Salma,
the wife of Abu Rafi`, for her role as midwife. He celebrated the birth by giving away a
measure of grain to all the destitute of Madinah. He assigned the newborn to the care of
Umm Sayf, a wet nurse, who owned seven goats whose milk she was to put at the disposal of
the newborn. Every day Muhammad would visit the house of Mariyah in order to take another
look at his son's radiant face and to reassure himself of the newborn's continued health
and growth. All this incited the strongest jealousy among the barren wives.
The question was, how far would these wives be able to bear the constant challenge?
One day, with the pride characteristic of new parents, the Prophet carried his son on
his arm and walked into `A'ishah's quarters in order to show him to her. He pointed out to
her his great resemblance to his offspring. `A'ishah looked at the baby and said
that she saw no resemblance at all. When the Prophet observed how much the child
was growing, `A'ishah responded waspishly that any child given the amount of milk which
Ibrahim was getting would grow just as big and strong as he. Indeed, the birth of
Ibrahim brought such disaffection to the wives of the Prophet as would go beyond these and
similar unfriendly answers. It reached such proportions that revelation itself voiced a
special condemnation. Undoubtedly, the whole affair had left its imprint on the
life of Muhammad as well as on the history of Islam. (pp. 432-435;
source;
bold and underline emphasis ours)
Aishas comments that the child did not resemble the father are rather ironic
since Mariyah was accused of committing adultery with the eunuch who had accompanied her
to Medina. It is therefore possible that the wives themselves spread this rumor in order
to separate Muhammad from Mariyah. As one modern Muslim author noted in relation to
the wives reaction at the news of Mariyahs pregnancy:
Soon the good news spread through Madina that the Prophet of God was expecting a child
from the Egyptian Maria. There is no need for us to explain to the reader here the painful
impact of this news upon the wives of the Prophet. Why should this stranger bear a child
whilst she had been but a year in Madina, when some of them had been in the house of the
Prophet for many years without bearing a child? Why should God favour her with this great
blessing while the Mothers of the Faithful, among them the daughters of Abu Bakr and
Umar, bint Zad al-Rakab and the grand daughter of Abu Talib, were denied this
favour? They were consumed with jealousy, not knowing what to do or say, and a
whisper spread accusing Maria of the same thing which was charged against
Aisha. But Aisha was justified by Heaven. Would then Maria
aspire to justification by Heaven too? God did not forsake her in her predicament, but
gave her a decisive proof against the false accusations One day he carried the child
in his arms to Aisha and asked her tenderly to see what signs of the father
appeared in this infant. She was about to cry, but held back her tears, saying, "I
see no similarity between you and him." Instantly he perceived her torment and left
with the boy, feeling pity for her (Bint al-Shati', The Wives of the Prophet,
Translated from Arabic with introduction by Matti Moosa in collaboration with D. Nicholas
Ranson [Gorgias Press, First Gorgias Press Edition 2006], pp. 210, 212; bold and underline
emphasis ours)
Again, it is Muhammad who is to be blamed for the jealousy and hatred the spouses felt
towards Mariyah due to his preferential and partial treatment, seen in the fact that he
spent considerably more time with his concubine. His attitude didnt solve the
problem but greatly contributed to the strife and pain of the harem:
Muhammad ibn Abd Allah al-Zuhri related the following from Anas ibn Malik, who
said that Maria, the bonds-woman of the Prophet, was in her quarters and a Coptic man used
to bring her water and firewood. When the people saw this, they said knowingly, "A
foreigner goes to see a foreigner." The Prophet heard this and sent our Lord
Ali ibn Abu-Talib there, who saw the Copt resting in a palm tree. When our Lord
Ali pulled his sword the man was frightened and threw off his robe in fright to
reveal his nakedness; and Ali saw that his member was cut off. Ali returned to
the Prophet and related what he saw. Then Gabriel, the entrusted Angel of Revelation,
followed and said, "Peace be unto you, O Father of Ibrahim." When the Prophet
heard this greeting, his mind became at peace.
The Prophet, anxious for Maria, removed her to al-Alia in the suburbs of
Madina, for her safety and comfort and to take care of her health and her burden.
Aishah said, "I have never felt so jealous of a woman as I did of Maria,
because she was beautiful with curled hair. The Prophet admired her and accommodated her
at the beginning in the house of Harith ibn al-Numan and she became our neighbour.
He was with her most of the day and night. She became unhappy, so he moved her
to al-Alia, but he saw her continuously there which became EVEN HARDER for
us to bear. Then God blessed him with a son from her while denying us this
blessing." (Ibid., pp. 210-211; bold, capital and underline emphasis ours)
And this is the fact that Zawadi has to contend with: Muhammad failed as a husband and
was the chief source of his wives pain and suffering. His preference for some women
and willful neglect of certain others were the reasons why his spouses were unhappy and
miserable, leading to tension and strife between them.
As we said earlier, Muhammad could have prevented his wives from experiencing such
anguish by choosing to do what was better. He could have shown them mercy by exercising
restraint, by refraining himself from having more than one wife. After all, didnt he
himself say that it is better to have only one wife in cases where a person fears that he
cant deal justly with several spouses?
If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of
your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal
justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess,
that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. S. 4:3 Y. Ali
Didnt he further claim that a person is not capable of treating multiple wives
fairly?
Ye are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent
desire: But turn not away (from a woman) altogether, so as to leave her (as it
were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding, and practise
self-restraint, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. S. 4:129 Y. Ali
And since Muhammad failed to treat his women fairly wouldnt it have been better
for him to follow his own counsel and limit himself to only one wife? At the very least,
being monogamous would have insured that there wouldnt be more than one woman
competing for Muhammads love and attention, and therefore no jealousy for anyone to
contend with.
Sadly, Muhammad didnt take the high road by doing what was better but chose to
act upon and carry out his sexual urges and desires.
Zawadi claims that Q. 4:3 and 129 are not commanding Muslims to love their wives
equally since:
You cannot EQUALLY love two people. You cannot control your heart.
Zawadi says that these texts are exhorting Muslims to provide for and spend time with
all the wives equally. He then quotes some commentators to substantiate this egregious
eisegesis.
In the first place, note Zawadis question begging. He assumes that these
citations cannot be commanding Muslims to love the wives equally on the grounds that this
is not possible. But this is precisely the problem! If we interpret Q. 4:3 in light of
4:129 then the plain meaning is that a person should limit himself to only one spouse
since he is incapable of loving more than one woman equally and will fail to be fair and
just with all of them.
And this is the real reason why Zawadi and the others must limit the interpretation of
fair and just treatment to monetary spending and time they realize that it is not
possible to carry out the plain meaning of these verses since a person is not capable of
loving all his wives equally. They, therefore, have to come up with some convenient reply
to make sense out of these commands. In fact, it is partly because Muhammad failed to love
all his wives equally that Muslims were led to explain these texts in this manner,
obviously to avoid having to admit that their prophet sinned and broke the commands of his
god!
Furthermore, even if we were to accept Zawadis proposed interpretation Muhammad
would still be considered a failure since he doesnt measure up even to this
explanation. Muhammad failed to adequately provide the material needs of his wives,
forcing them to live in less than ideal conditions even though he had amassed a ton of
wealth:
'A'isha reported: We the family of Muhammad (may peace be upon him) used to spend (the
whole) month in which we (did not need to) kindle the fire as (we had nothing to cook); we
had only dates and water (to fill our bellies). (Sahih Muslim, Book 042,
Number 7089)
'A'isha reported that Allah's Messenger (way peace be upon him) died (in such a state)
that there had been nothing in my wooden tub which a living being could afford to eat but
a handful of barley therein. I had been eating out of that for a fairly long duration when
I thought of measuring it and it was almost finished. (Sahih Muslim, Book 042,
Number 7091)
'A'isha used to say to 'Urwa: Son of my sister, by Allah, I used to see the new moon,
then the new moon, then the new moon, i. e. three moons to two months, and fire was not
kindled in the house of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). I ('Urwa) said: Auntie,
then what were your means of sustenance? She said: Dates and water. But it (so happened)
that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) had some Ansar as his neighbours and they
had milch animals and they used to send to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) some
milk of their (animals) and he served that to us. (Sahih Muslim, Book 042,
Number 7092)
Abu Hazim reported: I saw Abu Huraira point with his finger many a time and saying: By
One in Whose Hand is the life of Abu Huraira, Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him)
could not eat to his fill and provide his family bread of wheat beyond three days
successively until he left the world. (Sahih Muslim, Book 042,
Number 7098)
What kind of prophet is this that would allow his family to go on living in such a
manner? What kind of prophet would deprive his family of nutritious food or of cooked
meals for years when he had plenty of money to provide their basic necessities? And
didnt the wives have a right to complain about such living conditions?
It will not do to say that he was poor, as some of the hadiths claim, since the Islamic
source material also expressly says that he was anything but that since, as we noted
earlier, he had amassed great amounts of wealth and property. We will have more to say
about Muhammads great wealth in the next section.
Muhammad further failed to spend equal time with all of his wives, which means that no
matter how a Muslim interprets these specific texts Muhammad still doesnt measure up
to his own standards which he imposed on others.
Moreover, after quoting Q. 33:51 to prove that Muhammad could ignore any of his wives
Zawadi presents Ibn Kathirs exegesis which basically admits that Muhammad
didnt have to spend equal time with his spouses. And this is the gentleman that
Zawadi says served as a role model for how other Muslims are to treat their wives!
If this isnt confusing enough, Zawadi asserts that Muhammad did divide his time
fairly with his wives even though he has to ignore or brush aside the statements of other
exegetes as well as specific hadiths which teach the exact opposite.
Narrated 'Urwa from 'Aisha: The wives of Allah's Apostle were in two groups. One group consisted of 'Aisha,
Hafsa, Safiyya and Sauda; and the other group consisted of Um Salama and the other wives
of Allah's Apostle. The Muslims knew that Allah's Apostle loved 'Aisha, so if any of
them had a gift and wished to give to Allah's Apostle, he would delay it, till Allah's
Apostle had come to 'Aisha's home and then he would send his gift to Allah's Apostle in
her home. The group of Um Salama discussed the matter together and decided that Um
Salama should request Allah's Apostle to tell the people to send their gifts to him in
whatever wife's house he was. Um Salama told Allah's Apostle of what they had said, but he
did not reply. Then they (those wives) asked Um Salama about it. She said, "He did
not say anything to me." They asked her to talk to him again. She talked to him again
when she met him on her day, but he gave no reply. When they asked her, she replied that
he had given no reply. They said to her, "Talk to him till he gives you a
reply." When it was her turn, she talked to him again. He then said to her, "Do
not hurt me regarding Aisha, AS THE DIVINE INSPIRATIONS DO NOT COME TO ME ON ANY OF THE
BEDS EXCEPT THAT OF AISHA." On that Um Salama said, "I repent to Allah for
hurting you." Then the group of Um Salama called Fatima, the daughter of Allah's
Apostle and sent her to Allah's Apostle to say to him, "Your wives request to
treat them and the daughter of Abu Bakr ON EQUAL TERMS." Then Fatima conveyed the
message to him. The Prophet said, "O my daughter! Don't you love whom I love?"
She replied in the affirmative and returned and told them of the situation. They requested
her to go to him again but she refused. They then sent Zainab bint Jahsh who went to him and
used harsh words saying, "Your wives request you to treat them and the daughter of
Ibn Abu Quhafa ON EQUAL TERMS." On that she raised her voice AND ABUSED 'Aisha to her
face so much so that Allah's Apostle looked at 'Aisha to see whether she would retort.
'Aisha started replying to Zainab till she silenced her. The Prophet then looked at
'Aisha and said, "She is really the daughter of Abu Bakr."
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 47,
Number 755)
Note, once again, that it was Muhammads preferential treatment of certain wives
and willful neglect of others that caused these women to abuse and insult each other.
And here is what the renowned Muslim exegete and linguist al-Zamakhshari wrote:
It is related that the Prophet (refrained from sexual intercourse and) put
off temporarily the following wives: Sauda, Juwairiya. Safiyya, Maimuna, and Umm
Habiba. In so doing he used to grant them a share (of sexual intercourse) according TO
HIS WISH. Among the wives whom the Prophet preferred to take to himself belong
Aisha, Hafsa, Umm Salama, and Zainab (bint Jash). Thus, he used to put five
off temporarily in order to take four to himself. (On the other hand) it is related
that, disregarding divorce and the selection concerned with it, the Prophet treated (all
his wives) the same, with the exception of Sauda, who relinquished the night
belonging to her to Aisha and said (to the Prophet): Do not divorce me
but let me remain in the company of your wives! ... (Helmut Gtje, The Qur'an
and Its Exegesis, translated and edited by Alford T. Welch [Oneworld Publications,
Oxford England], pp. 90-91; bold and capital emphasis ours)
The above sources make it patently obvious that Muhammad did anything but spend equal
time with his women.
To further justify Muhammads actions Zawadi argues that even most parents love
one child a little more than the rest. The reader should see why this is a false analogy
which does absolutely nothing to justify Muhammads neglect of certain wives. In the
first place how does Zawadi know for certain that most parents love one child more than
the others? Has he personally observed this to be the case in most situations? Has he
visited every family in the world to see whether most of the parents love one child more
than the rest? Does he know for certain that this has always been the case, even in the
past? Isnt it possible that most parents love all their children equally?
Second, even if it were true that most parents that have more than one child are
incapable of loving all of them equally yet this is not their intention. The desire of
any healthy parent is to have the same love for all his/her children. But this fails as
an analogy with Muhammads situation since, unlike a parent who intends to love all
the children completely, Muhammad knew full well that he wouldnt be able to love
all his wives equally since he himself said so in Q. 4:129!
In light of his own admission, Muhammad could have spared himself the embarrassment
and prevented his community from experiencing similar problems by exercising a little
self-control and contented himself with monogamy.
Muhammads Wealth
Zawadi says:
Shamoun then goes on to quote Surah 4:2-5 to show that the Prophet did not treat his
wives fairly when it came to materialistic provisions, however I failed to see where he
showed that the Prophet (peace be upon him) didn't.
If Zawadi failed to see it then he needs to reread my article as well as to take the
time to carefully read over this current one.
Zawadi links to an article that discusses Muhammads share of the booty and also
quotes a commentary to explain the meaning of Q. 93:8
However, this verse was referring to a certain period...
And he also said: (Did He not find thee) O
Muhammad (destitute) poor (and enrich (thee)) with the wealth of Khadijah;
and it is also said this means: and made you content with that which He gave you? The
Prophet (pbuh) said: "Yes, O Gabriel!" (Tanwr
al-Miqbs min Tafsr Ibn ?Abbs, Commentary on Surah 93:8, Source)
So this was way before the Prophet's migration to Medina. So this verse can't be
used to show that he was rich in Medina.
Or it could simply mean.
And did He not find you needy, poor, and
enrich you?, [and] made you content with the spoils and other things which He gave you -
in a hadith [it is stated], 'Wealth comes not from the proliferation of transient
[worldly] goods, but wealth comes from the contentedness of the soul'.(Jalal ud-Din Siyuti, Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Commentary on Surah 93:8, Source: www.altafsir.com)
So its possible that God made the Prophet rich with the guidance He has bestowed upon him.
Let us highlight the parts he obviously wanted to pass over:
And did He not find you needy, poor, and enrich you?, [and] made you content WITH
THE SPOILS and other things which He gave you - in a hadith [it is stated],
'Wealth comes not from the proliferation of transient [worldly] goods, but wealth comes
from the contentedness of the soul'. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn;
source;
bold, capital and underline emphasis ours)
And here is what the exegetes and biographers say in regards to Muhammad being in
control of the booty:
And from his narration on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas who said
concerning the saying of Allah, exalted is He, ((They ask thee (O Muhammad) of the spoils
of war): 'He says: your Companions ask you about the spoils of war on the Day of Badr
and also about the officers for weapons and horses. (Say) O Muhammad: (The spoils of war
belong to Allah and the messenger) THE SPOILS OF WAR at Badr belong to Allah and His
Messenger, and none of it is yours; it is also said: they all belong to Allah and
the command of the Messenger regarding what is allowed, (so keep your duty to Allah) fear
Allah concerning taking the spoils of war, (and adjust the matter of your difference)
solve the differences among you: let the rich give to the poor and the strong to the weak
and the young to the elderly, (and obey Allah and His messenger) in the matter of
reconciliation, (if ye are (true) believers) in Allah and His Messenger.
(Tanwr al-Miqbs min Tafsr Ibn Abbs;
source;
bold, capital and underline emphasis ours)
(2) Just as the Battle of Badr was the Muslims first experience with sacrifice
and fighting for the sake of God, weak and few in number as they were, it was also their
first experience of being tempted by the sight of the spoils of war in the aftermath of
battle some of the Muslims began trying to beat one another to the spoils. Some
of them got into such a disagreement over who most deserved them that they nearly came to
blows over the matter. At this time, the ruling concerning the distribution of spoils
among the fighters had not yet been revealed; hence, they brought their dispute before the
Prophet. It was at this time that the following words [Q. 8:1-2] from God were
revealed As you can see, these two verses contain no reply to their question; on the
contrary, they direct the Muslims attention away from their dispute entirely saying:
The spoils belong to none of you; rather, they belong to God and His Messenger
Thereafter, when these Muslims had heeded the guidance contained in these verses and
turned their attention away from the matter over which they had disputed, God in
a brilliant didactic tour de force revealed other verses which specified how the
spoils were to be divided among the various Muslim fighters. (Dr. M. Said Ramadan
al-Buti, The Jurisprudence of the Prophetic Biography & A Brief History of the
Orthodox Caliphate, translated by Nancy Roberts, revised by Anas al-Rifai [Dar
al Fikr in Damascus, Reprinted 2006], pp. 330-331; comments within brackets and underline
emphasis ours)
Muhammad also received some sizeable real estate out of his military expeditions:
Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab:
Malik ibn Aws al-Hadthan said: One of the arguments put forward by Umar was that he said
that the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) received three things exclusively to
himself: Banu an-Nadir, Khaybar and Fadak. The Banu an-Nadir property was kept
wholly for his emergent needs, Fadak for travellers, and Khaybar was divided by the
Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) into three sections: two for Muslims, and one as a
contribution for his family. If anything remained after making the contribution of his
family, he divided it among the poor Emigrants. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 19,
Number 2961)
Zawadi accuses me of not knowing Arabic and claims that I cited a faulty translation of
al-Bukhari:
Shamoun then quotes the following hadith...
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Whenever a dead man in debt was brought to Allah's Apostle he would ask, "Has he left
anything to repay his debt?" If he was informed that he had left something to repay
his debts, he would offer his funeral prayer, otherwise he would tell the Muslims to offer
their friend's funeral prayer. When Allah made the Prophet wealthy through conquests,
he said, "I am more rightful than other believers to be the guardian of the
believers, so if a Muslim dies while in debt, I am responsible for the repayment of his
debt, and whoever leaves wealth (after his death) it will belong to his heirs."
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 37, Number 495)
I will not lay any criticism on Shamoun for he is ignorant of the Arabic language and
therefore he would not have been able to verify if this was a correct translation or not.
The hadith in Arabic is here http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=3606
and it does not say that the Prophet became wealthy through conquests. It says
that God made the Prophet victorious in his conquests. Sam Shamoun could verify this
with his translator Dimitrius if he wishes to do so.
It is apparent from his comments that Zawadi takes great pride in the fact that he
knows Arabic. The Bible warns against being prideful:
"When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom."
Proverbs 11:2
"Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall." Proverbs 16:18
"Before his downfall a man's heart is proud, but humility comes before
honor." Proverbs 18:12
We will now show that the translation is correct and thereby expose Zawadis
ignorance and inability to understand that words are defined by and within their
respective contexts:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Whenever a dead man IN DEBT was brought to Allah's Apostle he would ask, "Has he left
anything to repay his debt?" If he was informed that he had left something to repay
his debts, he would offer his funeral prayer, otherwise he would tell the Muslims to offer
their friend's funeral prayer. When Allah made the Prophet wealthy through conquests, he
said, "I am more rightful than other believers to be the guardian of the believers,
so if a Muslim dies while IN DEBT, I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REPAYMENT OF HIS DEBT, and
whoever leaves wealth (after his death) it will belong to his heirs."
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 37,
Number 495)
The context is dealing with Muhammad being a guarantor for anyone who was unable to pay
off his/her debt. Muhammads point is that since Allah granted him victory in
battles, where he amassed a large sum of booty for himself, he had the financial means to
pay a persons debt off. Thus, Hilali-Khan CORRECTLY translated the meaning of the
Arabic since they could see from the context that the point being made is that Muhammad
had become wealthy enough through conquest to help pay off any unpaid debt incurred by a
Muslim.
This is simply another example where Zawadi shows that he cannot understand the sources
he reads, whether these sources happen to be his own religious texts or Gods true
Word, the Holy Bible.
Zawadi claims that Muhammad didnt live a luxurious life in order to justify his
failure to provide for his wives. He then cites a hadith which says Muhammad borrowed
money in order to prove that he wasnt rich! This is despite the statements of the
hadiths which say that Muhammad was given a fifth of the plunder, had amassed several
pieces of lands, and received gold and silver from individuals:
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar:
The Prophet fought with the people of Khaybar, and captured their palm-trees and land,
and forced them to remain confined to their fortresses. So they concluded a treaty of
peace providing that gold, silver and weapons would go to the Apostle of Allah
(peace_be_upon_him), and whatever they took away on their camels would belong to them, on
condition that they would not hide and carry away anything. If they did (so), there would
be no protection for them and no treaty (with Muslims) (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 19,
Number 3000)
Interestingly, Muhammads great wealth led to a fight between Abu Bakr and Ali
and Fatima his wife, who happened to be Muhammads daughter:
Abu Salih al-Dirari Abd al-Razzaq b. Hammam Mamar
al-Zuhri Urwah Aishah: Fatimah and al-Abbas came to
Abu Bakr demanding their [share of] inheritance of the Messenger of God. They were
demanding the Messenger of Gods land in Fadak and his share of Khaybar[s
tribute]. Abu Bakr replied, "I have heard the Messenger of God say: Our [i.e.,
the prophets property] cannot be inherited and whatever we leave behind is alms
[i.e., to be given in charity]. The family of Muhammad will eat from it. By God I
will not abandon a course which I saw the Messenger of God practicing, but will continue
doing it accordingly." Fatimah shunned him and did not speak to him up until
she died. Ali buried her at night and did not permit Abu Bakr to attend [her burial].
While Fatimah was alive, Ali had respect among the people. After she died, their
attention turned away from him. Fatimah continued to live for six months after the
Messenger of Gods [death] and then died.
Mamar: A man asked al-Zuhri, "Did Ali not give his oath of allegiance
for six months?" "No, nor did anyone of the Banu Hashim until Ali
rendered his," he replied. When Ali saw that the peoples
attention had turned away from him, he begged for reconciliation with Abu Bakr. He sent
the latter, [asking him] to visit him, and [requesting] that nobody should accompany him.
Ali disliked that Umar should come with Abu Bakr, for he knew
Umars RUDENESS. Umar said [to Abu Bakr], "Dont go
alone." Abu Bakr replied, "By God, I will go alone. It is not possible that [the
Banu Hashim] might do anything to me," and he went. He entered Alis
presence while the Banu Hashim had gathered with him. Ali stood up, praised God and
extolled Him with what is due to Him. Then he said, "It is neither the denial of your
good qualities nor the rivalry of good, which God has given you, but the fact that
we considered that we have a right in this authority which you have MONOPOLIZIED."
Ali then mentioned his relationship with the Messenger of God and the rights of the
Banu Hashim. He continued speaking until Abu Bakr wept. After Ali stopped, Abu Bakr
pronounced shahadah, praised God, extolled Him with what is due to Him, then said,
"By God, the relationship of the Messenger of God is dearer to me [too]. I reach
[him] through my relationship [to him]. By God, I did not fall short of doing what was
requisite with regard to this property [i.e., the Prophets inheritance] which became
[a dispute] between you and me except for good. I had heard the Messenger of God saying:
Our [i.e., the prophets property] cannot be inherited and whatever we leave
behind is alms [i.e., to be given in charity]. The family of Muhammad will eat from
it. God forbid that I should recall a thing which the Messenger of God did without
doing it, God willing!" Ali said that he would render the oath of allegiance
that evening. After Abu Bakr had prayed the noon prayers, he approached the people and
excused Ali with his apology. Ali stood up, lauded the right of Abu Bakr by
mentioning his fine qualities and his precedence and went to him, giving the oath of
allegiance. The people came to Ali saying that he had done the right thing.
Aisha said: The people got close to Ali when he came close to what was
right [i.e., in rendering his oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr]. (The History of
Al-Tabari: The Last Years of the Prophet, translated and annotated by Ismail K.
Poonawala [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1990], Volume IX, pp.
196-198; bold, capital and underline emphasis ours)
The translator has a rather interesting note:
1356. Tabrizi, Mishkat, III, 209; Mishkat (trans. Robson), II, 1310;
transmitted by both Bukhari and Muslim. The Shiis refute this tradition,
saying that it contradicts the Quranic teachings on family inheritance.
It was the first and most important step taken by Abu Bakr and Umar in their
attempts to displace the Banu Hashim, and especially Ali, from their prerogatives in
the leadership of the Muslim polity. Acceptance of this claim of inheritance based on
family ties would have opened the door widely to Alis rights to the
succession. Moreover, the income from both these sources was considerable, and it would
have given some leverage to Ali. Ibn Shabbah, Tarikh, I, 176-218,
Jafri, Origins, 14-16, 63. For Fatimahs reply and refutation, see Tabarsi,
Ihtijaj, I, 119-40. (Ibid., p. 196)
The Muslims even accused each other of treachery and lying over this issue:
It is reported by Zuhri that this tradition was narrated to him by Malik b. Aus who
said: Umar b. al-Khattab sent for me and I came to him when the day had advanced. I found
him in his house sitting on his bare bed-stead, reclining on a leather pillow. He said (to
me): Malik, some people of your tribe have hastened to me (with a request for help). I
have ordered a little money for them. Take it and distribute it among them. I said: I wish
you had ordered somebody else to do this job. He said: Malik, take it (and do what you
have been told). At this moment (his man-servant) Yarfa' came in and said: Commander of
the Faithful, what do you say about Uthman, Abd al-Rahman b. 'Auf, Zubair and Sa'd (who
have come to seek an audience with you)? He said: Yes, and permitted them. So they
entered. Then he (Yarfa') came again and said: What do you say about 'Ali and Abbas
(who are present at the door)? He said: Yes, and permitted them to enter. Abbas said:
Commander of the Faithful, decide (the dispute) between me AND THIS SINFUL, TREACHEROUS,
DISHONEST LIAR. The people (who were present) also said: Yes. Commander of the Faithful,
do decide (the dispute) and have mercy on them. Malik b. Aus said: I could well imagine
that they had sent them in advance for this purpose (by 'Ali and Abbas). 'Umar said: Wait
and be patient. I adjure you by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained,
don't you know that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: "We
(prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity"?
They said: Yes. Then he turned to Abbas and 'Ali and said: I adjure you both by Allah by
Whose order the heavens and earth are sustained, don't you know that the Messenger of
Allah (may peace be upon him) said: "We do not have any heirs; what we leave
behind is (to be given in) charity"? They (too) said: Yes. (Then) Umar said:
Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, had done to His Messenger (may peace be upon him) a
special favour that He has not done to anyone else except him. He quoted the Qur'anic
verse: "What Allah has bestowed upon His Apostle from (the properties) of the people
of township is for Allah and His Messenger". The narrator said: I do not know whether
he also recited the previous verse or not. Umar continued: The Messenger of Allah (may
peace be upon him) distributed among you the properties abandoned by Banu Nadir. By Allah,
he never preferred himself over you and never appropriated anything to your exclusion.
(After a fair distribution in this way) this property was left over.
The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) would meet from its income his annual
expenditure, and what remained would be deposited in the Bait-ul-Mal. (Continuing further)
he said: I adjure you by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained. Do
you know this? They said: Yes. Then he adjured Abbas and 'Ali as he had adjured the other
persons and asked: Do you both know this? They said: Yes. He said: When the Messenger of
Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said: "I am the successor of the
Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)." Both of you came to demand your shares
from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah). (Referring to Hadrat 'Abbas),
he said: You demanded your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to
'Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr
(Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said:
"We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity."
SO BOTH OF YOU THOUGHT HIM TO BE A LIAR, SINFUL, TREACHEROUS AND DISHONEST. And
Allah knows that he was true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. When Abu Bakr
passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon
him) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), YOU THOUGHT ME TO BE A LIAR, SINFUL,
TREACHEROUS AND DISHONEST. And Allah knows that I am true, virtuous, well-guided and a
follower of truth. I became the guardian of this property. Then you as well as he came to
me. Both of you have come and your purpose is identical. You said: Entrust the property to
us. I said: If you wish that I should entrust it to you, it will be on the condition
that both of you will undertake to abide by a pledge made with Allah that you will use it
in the same way as the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used it. SO BOTH OF YOU
GOT IT. He said: Wasn't it like this? They said: Yes. He said: Then you have (again)
come to me with the request that I should adjudge between you. No, by Allah. I will not
give any other judgment except this until the arrival of the Doomsday. If you are unable
to hold the property on this condition, return it to me. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019,
Number 4349)
It has been narrated by 'Urwa b Zubair on the authority of 'A'isha, wife of the Holy
Prophet (may peace be upon him), that Fatima, daughter of the Messenger of Allah (may
peace be upon him), requested Abu Bakr, after the death of the Messenger of Allah (may
peace he upon him), that he should set apart her share from what the Messenger of Allah
(may peace be upon him) had left from the properties that God had bestowed upon him.
Abu Bakr said to her: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: "We do
not have any heirs; what we leave behind is Sadaqa (charity)." The narrator said:
She (Fatima) lived six months after the death of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon
him) and she used to demand from Abu Bakr her share from the legacy of the Messenger of
Allah (may peace be upon him) from Khaibar, Fadak and his charitable endowments at Medina.
Abu Bakr refused to give her this, and said: I am not going to give up doing anything
which the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to do. I am afraid that it I go
against his instructions in any matter I shall deviate from the right course. So far as
the charitable endowments at Medina were concerned, 'UMAR HANDED THEM OVER TO 'ALI
AND ABBAS, BUT ALI GOT THE BETTER OF HIM (AND KEPT THE PROPERTY UNDER HIS EXCLUSIVE
POSSESSION). And as far as Khaibar and Fadak were concerned 'Umar kept them with him,
and said: These are the endowments of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) (to
the Umma). Their income was spent on the discharge of the responsibilities that devolved
upon him on the emergencies he had to meet. And their management was to be in the hands
of one who managed the affairs (of the Islamic State). The narrator said: They have been
managed as such up to this day. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019,
Number 4354)
If this is being poor than we dont ever want to be rich!
For more on the issue of Muhammads riches and wills please read the following
articles:
The foregoing reports show that Zawadis narration merely proves that the hadith
literature is filled with contradictions.
More importantly, if Muhammad was that poor where he needed to borrow money then he had
no business having more than one wife. After all, didnt Zawadi claim that Q. 4:3 and
129 commands Muslims to be financially capable of providing for all of ones spouses?
If so, wouldnt this mean that Muhammad again violated the injunctions of his own
scriptures by taking more than one wife when he was incapable of financially meeting all
their needs?
Zawadi also claimed that:
The reason why the Prophet (peace be upon him) got irritated when extra money was being
asked from his side was his fear that his wives were beginning to become materialistic,
especially since he already got used to the fact of living simple. The Prophet gave Aisha
a simple dowry...
He quotes a hadith from Aisha where she says:
Aisha narrated that the Prophet said: "The most
blessed woman is the easiest in her expenditure."(An Nasa'i, Ishrat
an'Nisa', vol. 5, p.402, cited in Muhammad Fathi Mus'ad, The Wives of the Prophet
Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, pp. 44)
Note, once again, how Zawadi has to assault the character of Muhammads wives by
accusing them of being materialistic. Instead of blaming Muhammad for withholding money
from his wives, or for not providing enough money or food to meet their daily needs,
Zawadi has to slander the "mothers of the faithful". The problem with
Zawadis argument is that even though Muhammad may have wanted to live frugally or to
pursue a simple lifestyle this didnt give him the right to not adequately meet the
basic needs of his wives. If anything, this should have been all the more reason not to
have more than one spouse.
It seems that Muhammad wanted to have his cake and eat it too; he wanted to have as
many wives as he could get without having to spend money on them, but forcing them to live
under less than ideal circumstances.
Zawadi concludes his "rebuttal" with a false analogy:
I also wanted to clarify the difference between treating one's wives
EQUALLY and FAIRLY. Treating people equally does not necessarily mean that you are
treating them fairly.
For example, I can't give the marketing manager of a company the same equal salary that
I give to the executive. Its not fair, because one works more than the other.
Similarly, you might have one wife who has 3 kids and another wife with no kids. Its
not fair that you give both of them a one bedroom apartment for the wife who has 3 kids
needs a larger house while the one with no kids does not.
So just because someone might not treat his wives EQUALLY, that does not meant that he
is not treating them FAIRLY. He might be treating them differently according to specific
situations and contexts that deem it suitable.
The problem with Zawadis analogy is that Muhammad neither treated his wives
fairly nor equally. He neglected to spend equal time with all of his wives (even
threatening to divorce one wife Sauda because he was no longer attracted to her), failed
to adequately provide for all of them financially, threatened them with divorce and
judgment when they complained about his unfair and preferential treatment of them etc.
Moreover, Zawadi again puts the cart before the horse since there would be no need to
worry about treating the wives fairly, as opposed to equally, if Muhammad had upheld
monogamy as the standard for marriage instead of polygamy.
Lord Jesus willing, we will address the other issues raised by Zawadi in a future post.
That is the Sunni Dilemma!
According to Sunni writings, Muhammad expressly prohibited anyone from writing down his hadiths. The reason why he supposedly did this was to ensure that his words would not get mixed in or confused with the Quran:
We must make a clear distinction between the Qur’
The Quran refers to a specific group of Jews writing down a book that wasn’t from God and tried to pass it off as being God’s revelation:
Do you (faithful believers) covet that they will believe in your religion in spite of the fact that a party of
