Home

 Articles

 Op-ed

 Authors

 FAQ

 Leaving Islam
 Library
 Gallery
 Comments
 Debates
  Links
 Forum

 

 

Examples set by Muhammad

To understand why there is so much violence in Islam, we have to look into two sources. One is the Quran and the other is the examples set by Muhammad. Throughout this book I have quoted some of the verses of the Quran that show not just the absurdity of that book but also its violence. To make an exhaustive list of all the violent verses of the Quran would make the book tedious and boring. To the see how much violence it contains, all it takes is to read it.

In this chapter I will focus on Muhammad himself and the examples that he set.

Muhammad claimed to have "sublime morals" (Q.68:4). and “a good example to follow" (Q. 33:21). He referred to himself as "the mercy of God for all the worlds" (21:107). Let us take a glimpse at his life and verify these claims.

When Muhammad left Mecca, he was virtually penniless. According to some hadiths, he depended on his Medinan followers and sometimes the Jews for his sustenance. Occasionally he would go to bed with empty stomach. His Meccan followers were barely subsisting. They used to work for the Jews doing menial works.

However this was not the deal Muhammad had offered his followers whom he had urged to migrate from Mecca. He promised them riches not poverty. How would he deliver what he promised them?.... Through robberies!

Six months after his arrival to Medina, Muhammad started his marauding enterprise and attacked the merchant caravans.

In a correspondence that I had with Ayatollah Montazeri, the most respected cleric of Iran who once was nominated to succeed Khomeini but fell from the grace for his moderate views, he wrote:

“As for the raids at the merchant caravans of the Quraish this caravan comprehended several wealthy Meccan enemies of Islam and was accompanied by Abu Sofyan the renowned arch enemy of Islam and the Muslims. In that year the hostilities of the Quraish and their instigations against Islam and the Muslims had intensified. Medina had just become the political and governmental center for the Muslims and it was under the attack of its Quraish enemies from every directions.

Many Muslims were forced to abandon their homes due to the Quraish persecution and had immigrated to Medina. These people wanted to retaliate and reclaim their properties from the Quraish. They had been informed that this caravan carried a lot of wealth. The leadership of the Muslims was also planning to render the highways that were purveying economically and militarily the enemy, unsafe. The main objective of this sudden attack was to render insecure the arteries so that the enemy is weakened in their war against the Muslims. These wars continued until Mecca was conquered.

Obviously when two countries or two forces are in war, and while there are no peace treaties between them, each side is justified to debilitate the economical and the military strength of the opposing party and threaten their security.

This was, and still is, an accepted practice in the world. Highway robbery however is something completely different. A highway robber is a thug and a hoodlum that endangers the lives and the safety of the people that live peacefully in their own city or country without showing enmity to others and steals their property.

In my response to Ayatollah I wrote:

Dear Ayatollah Ozma Montazeri,

To begin on this subject I would like to thank you for being truthful and unlike most of the Muslims who claim all the wars of the Prophet were defensive you acknowledge that he was actually the aggressor and it was he who raided merchant caravans. This saves a lot of time for both of us because I don’t have to list his numerous attacks at those whom he considered to be his enemies.

However, you seem to justify his raids at merchant caravans, towns and his killing of the civilians because as you see them they were strategic military plans to weaken the position of the enemy. Muhammad’s own explanation was that Muslims have the right to take back what the Quraish took away from them when they forced them to exile.

Notwithstanding, the truth is that Meccans did not drive the Muslims out of their homes. The Muslims emigrated on their own volition and because of Mohammad’s insistence. At first he ordered his followers to emigrate to Abyssinia and then when he found enough disciples in Medina, he sent them thither.

The truth is that despite the fact that Muhammad constantly insulted the religion of the Quraish and infuriated them with his abrasive behavior there is little retaliation on the part of the Meccans.

Muslims today would not tolerate any criticism against their religion. They would kill at once any person who dares to question their belief. This is what the prophet taught them to do. But Arabs prior to Muhammad were more tolerant. They used to live with the Jews, Christians and Sabeans in harmony without any sign of religious animosity between them. Only in Ka’ba there were 360 deities. Each Arab tribe had its own god and they never fought over religion. Yet the ultimate test of tolerance came when Muhammad started to taunt their gods. Despite that kind of abuse the Quraish evinced incredible degree of tolerance and although being offended, never harmed Muhammad or any of his cohorts.

Compare this to the treatment of the Baha’is in Iran. Baha’is do not insult Muhammad or his Allah, they do not reject the Imams nor disagree with any part of the Quran. All they say is that their messenger is the Promised One of the Muslims. This is nothing compared to Muhammad’s affronts of the beliefs of the people of Quraish. Nevertheless Muslims have not spared any act of atrocity against the Baha’is. They killed many of them, jailed them, tortured them, beat them, denied them of their basic human rights and treated them with utter inhumanity. None of that was done against Muhammad and his followers in Mecca even though he constantly accosted their gods with showers of taunts and would imprecate their sacred beliefs as if daring them to persecute.

When the Meccans had enough of it and could no more stand Muhammad’s mocking of their deities, a body of their elders repaired to Abu Talib, the uncle of the Prophet and complained: - “This Nephew of thine hath spoken opprobriously of our gods and our religion: and hath abused us as fools, and given out that our forefathers were all astray. Now, avenge us thyself of our adversary; or, (seeing that thou art in the same case with ourselves,) leave him to its that we may take our satisfaction.” Abu Talib spoke to them softly and assured them he would counsel his nephew to be more deferential. But Muhammad would not change his proceedings. So they went again to Abu Talib in great vexation; and warned him that if he would not restrain his nephew from his offensive conduct, they would have to restrain him themselves. They added thus: - “and now verily we cannot have patience any longer with his abuse of us, our ancestors, and our gods. Wherefore either do thou hold him back from us, or thyself take part with him that the matter may be decided between us.”

This is all that is recorded about the persecution of the Muslims in Mecca. The above is a warning but falls short of issuing a threat. In fact until Abu Talib was alive and even after his death until Muhammad stayed in Mecca no harm was inflicted upon him and nor any of his followers suffered persecution for their beliefs.

There are stories about persecution of the early Muslims such as Omar beating his sister for converting to Islam. That is possible because Omar was a violent man with short tempers. But even this story is dubious because this hadith says this led to Omar’s acceptance of Islam. However there is another hadith where Omar describes his own conversion differently.

We have the story of Bilal. He is said to be ransomed by Abu Bakr when he was being tied and left in the sun. The truth is however that Bilal was not being tortured for believing in Islam. He was a slave of Bani Jumh and under the instruction of Muhammad he was planning to escape and go to Abyssinia. His master punished him for this and not for his belief. When Abu Bakr paid his price his master set him free.

The message of Muhammad was most agreeable to the slaves in Mecca. It is not that Muhammad was an advocate of anti slavery. He raided many cities and captured many free people whom he reduced to slaves and then traded them. However when he was in Mecca he encouraged his slave followers to escape and go to Abyssinia until his orders. Muhammad has plans for these emigrants that we shall see revealed a few years later.

These slaves converted to Islam to join the party of the Muslims and escape their slavery. They were often caught by their masters and beaten and tortured. This should not be mistaken as religious persecution but rather as punishment of the masters whose were concerned of losing their property.

There are other alleged persecution, such as that of Yasar and Jabr These two slaves were originally from Yemen who converted to Islam and are among those whom the Quraish said have instructed Muhammad about Christianity. Yasar is said to have been persecuted.

Among those slaves converted to Islam and said to be persecuted is Ammar who was freed by Aub Hodzeifa

The father of Ammar was Yasir. He was Yemenis who had married a slave girl called Sommeya. Both parents of Ammar converted to Islam. Some narratives say that Sommeya was persecuted and martyred.

The problem with the story of Sommeya is that there is also another narrative about her which says after Yasir she married Azrack, a Greek slave, belonging to a man of Taif, and to him she bore Salma. There is indeed a lot of confusion in these stories because Ammar was four years older than Muhammad, so when he converted to Islam (ca. 614, 615 AD) He must have been at least 46 years old. His mother Sommeya who bore a son to Yasir older than Ammar must have been at least in her sixties. At that age it is not likely that she was persecuted and killed nor it is likely to have married Azrak and bore him a child.

This is to make you see how unreliable and vague are these stories claiming persecution of the Muslims in Mecca.

However it is natural to imagine the Quraish were not pleased with Muhammad. Not because he was preaching a new religion. They already had hundreds of religions one more would have made no difference. And not because Muhammad was preaching monotheism, after all the Jews and Christians among them were monotheists and the Arabs were familiar with that concept. The reason the Meccans were wary of Muhammad was because he was insulting their beliefs, and encouraging their slaves to escape and join his army in Abyssinia.

Sir Willam Muir on the authority of Katib at Waqidi p.38; Hishami, p.69; Tabari; p.120. writes:

“Even after he had begun publicly to preach, and his followers had multiplied, the Quraish did not gainsay his doctrine. They would only point slightingly at him as he passed, and say: There goeth the Man of the children of Abd al Muttalib, to speak unto the people about the Heavens. But, adds tradition, when the Prophet began to abuse their idols, and to assert the perdition of their ancestors who had all died in unbelief, then they became displeased and began to treat him with contumely.” [p. 116 Life Of Mahomet. Volume II.William Muir, Esq., Smith, Elder, & Co., London, 1861]

Following the example of their prophet, the Muslims readily mock the beliefs of others including the Christians for believing in trinity but would react with violence if anyone dare to slight their religion.

Based on the narratives of Hishami, p.70 and Tabari, p.114. “The first blood shed in Islam” was spelt by Sa’d a follower of Muhammad who struck one of his neighbors with a camel goad when a fight broke between a group of believers and a few Meccans. So the first blood shed in Islam is the blood of a non-believer. There is no indication that the victim has died.

Muhammad’s secret plans

The question arises, if there were no persecutions against the Muslims, who forced them out of their homes? We know that many of them abandoned Mecca and went first to Abyssinia and then to Medina. Why would they leave their homes if they were not in danger?

The answer to this question can be found with Muhammad and what was going in his mind. It was he who asked them to leave. In fact he ordered them to leave making it a mandate from Allah. The Following verses answers this question.

“Lo! those who believed and left their homes and strove with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah, and those who took them in and helped them: these are protecting friends one of another. And those who believed but did not leave their homes, ye have no duty to protect them till they leave their homes; but if they seek help from you in the matter of religion then it is your duty to help (them) except against a folk between whom and you there is a treaty. Allah is Seer of what ye do.”(Q.8: 72)

These are very harsh words against his own followers who did not leave Mecca and stayed behind. In other part he presses further this point.

They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them, (Q.4: 89)

In the above verse was written when Muhammad was already in Medina and it has a very harsh tone. He is ordering the believers of Mecca to forsake their homes and go to Medina. He goes as far as to instruct other Muslims to kill those who decide to return home. This verse is another proof of the cultic nature of Islam. We are reminded of Jim Johns and his compound where he had his followers under control and would not let them go home.

As we can witness the exodus of the Muslims from Mecca was not due to any persecution by the idolaters. There was no such a persecution even though Muhammad exasperated the Quraish to their limit of forbearance with his triad of insults. The new converts left Mecca because Muhammad asked them to. His pressure tactics was so intense that he even told them that they would go to hell if they stayed behind and did not emigrate.

Lo! as for those whom the angels take (in death) while they wrong themselves, (the angels) will ask: In what were ye engaged? They will say: We were oppressed in the land. (The angels) will say: Was not Allah's earth spacious that ye could have migrated therein? As for such, their habitation will be hell, an evil journey's end;(Q.4: 97)

008.072
Those who believed, and adopted exile, and fought for the Faith, with their property and their persons, in the cause of Allah, as well as those who gave (them) asylum and aid,- these are (all) friends and protectors, one of another. As to those who believed but came not into exile, ye owe no duty of protection to them until they come into exile; but if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them, except against a people with whom ye have a treaty of mutual alliance. And (remember) Allah seeth all that ye do.

008.073
The Unbelievers are protectors, one of another: Unless ye do this, (protect each other), there would be tumult and oppression on earth, and great mischief.
008.074
Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the cause of Allah as well as those who give (them) asylum and aid,- these are (all) in very truth the Believers: for them is the forgiveness of sins and a provision most generous.
008.075
And those who accept Faith subsequently, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith in your company,- they are of you. But kindred by blood have prior rights against each other in the Book of Allah. Verily Allah is well-acquainted with all things

 

Muhammad grand plans,

The inevitable question is: “why?” Why would the Prophet force his followers to emigrate when they were not being persecuted? Why would he coerce them to leave their own homeland? This tactic was so unorthodox that even western historians and scholars of Islam like Sprenger and Muir have failed to see the plot that Muhammad was brewing in his mind from very early on.

Muhammad was a narcissist and narcissist dreams of grandiosity.

Muir, in The Life of Mohammad, quotes Hishami:

“The Quraish, hearing that Abu Talib lay at the point of death, sent a deputation in order that some contact should be made to bind both parties, after his decease should have removed all restraint upon Muhammad. They proposed accordingly that they should retain their ancient faith, and that Muhammad should promise to refrain from abuse or interference; in which case they on their part would agree not to molest him in his faith. Abu Talib called Muhammad, and communicated to him the reasonable request. Muhammad replied -" Nay, but there is one word, which if ye concede, you will thereby conquer Arabia, and reduce Ajam under subjection." "Good!" said Abu Jahl, "not one such word, but ten." Mahomet replied,-" Then say,-There is no God but the Lord, and abandon that which ye worship beside him." And they clapped their hands in rage;-" Dost thou desire, indeed, that we should turn our gods into one God? That were a strange affair!" And they began to say one to another, "This fellow is obstinate and impracticable. Ye will not get from him any concession that ye desire. Return, and let us walk after the faith of our forefathers till God determine the matter betwixt us and him." So they arose and departed.” [Hishami, p.136]

From the above story we can establish several facts.

a) The Quraish were not persecuting the Muslims and their leader but pleading with him to respect their beliefs.

b) Muhammad was adamant to continue his abrasive and opprobrious behavior towards the people of Mecca and their religion.

c) Muhammad was fantasizing to “conquer Arabia and reduce Ajam (Persia) under subjugation” even at a time when he was nobody.

Further on we will discover how the mind of Muhammad worked and how he could have such grandiose ideas that impressed the people around him and inspired them to make those reveries come true.

Is it befitting for a messenger of God to indulge in reveries about “conquering” and “subduing”? One would expect that the a man chosen by God to be the light for all mankind, would have nobler thoughts such as guiding, educating and liberating the people, not conquering them and subduing them. These should not be the thoughts of a messenger of God but of a conqueror and a vanquishing subjugator. These are the thoughts of authoritarian conquistadors like Changiz Khan, Napoleon, Hitler and Saddam Hussein, but not of a Prophet of God who, should radiate with love, compassion and other spiritual qualities.

Muhammad was indeed a vivid case of megalomania. He was a narcissist and a manic/depressive par excellence. When he was high, he had grandiose thoughts of conquering the world and subduing mighty nations and when he was low he would indulge in thoughts of suicide.

Sahih Bukhari V. 9, Book 87, Number 111

“….the Divine Inspiration was also paused for a while and the Prophet became so sad as we have heard that he intended several times to throw himself from the tops of high mountains and every time he went up the top of a mountain in order to throw himself down, Gabriel would appear before him and say, "O Muhammad! You are indeed Allah's Apostle in truth" whereupon his heart would become quiet and he would calm down and would return home. And whenever the period of the coming of the inspiration used to become long, he would do as before, but when he used to reach the top of a mountain, Gabriel would appear before him and say to him what he had said before.

This change of mood gives us the clue that the Prophet was not a messenger of any god but a mentally disturbed and unstable man. His dreams of conquering and subduing were so intense, and they consumed his inner thoughts with such an ardor that they expunged the shades of right and wrong from his conscience. For him his fantasies of domination became his primary goal. And to achieve that goal he would stop at nothing.

A narcissist is a pathological liar but he is the first to believe in his lies.

The Psychiatrist Dr. Len Sperry notes that individuals with NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) are expansive and inclined to exaggerate; they focus on images and themes and take liberties with the facts. They use self-deception to preserve their own illusions. They will do whatever is needed to reinforce their self-ascribed superior status [Len Sperry, Handbook Of Diagnosis And Treatment Of The DSM-IV Personality Disorders 1995, p. 114]

 

Muhammad lied compulsively and so convincingly that even he eventually believed in his own lies. Although his earlier visions were the result of his hallucinations, when those hallucinations stopped he kept revealing spurious verses and perusing his dreams of grandiosity with a remarkable obduracy distinctive only to mentally infirm.

Narcissists are often charismatic people with compelling personalities. Hitler is a good example of a pathological narcissist. He would mesmerize his audience, with his speeches, his oomph, his confidence and his charm. Watching Hitler’s buoyant, upbeat, inspiring and motivating talks with his of self-assuredness and see how he captivated the imagination of millions of Germans perhaps can give us an insight into the mind of the Apostle of Allah and understand why he has such a spell over his foolhardy and unsophisticated followers.

Muhammad dreamed of conquering Arabia and subduing the Persia even when his followers were but an untrained and insignificant lot. However Muhammad was not just a dreamer, but someone who would follow his dreams with extraordinary single mindedness and endurance. In his quest for personal grandiosity he was ready sacrifice everything. He killed those who opposed him. He slew those who turned their backs to him. He assassinated those who criticized him. He wiped out the entire Jewish and Christian population from the Arabic Peninsula and executed one of the most ruthless genocides of the Jew of Medina and Kheibar. He fabricated stories of jinns and angels and fooled his followers with tales of his visits to Heaven and Hell. And he invented an Allah, proclaimed to be his messenger, thus demanding total and unconditional submission for himself as the only mediator between man and God.

His dreams were of grandiosity and his plan was perfect. His timing was ideal and he had the best people to work with. Arabs of his time were superstitious, bigot, fanatical, ambitious, ruthless, barbarian, stubborn, chauvinist and above all a gullible crowd. Conquering Arabia and subduing Ajam with the help of these people for man of his allure in that milieu was a synch.

But how would he realize his fantasies without an army? How would he convince his followers to take up their swords and use it against their own brothers, fathers and friends? He had to create the discontent. He had to cause enmity where there was none. He had to incite brother against brother and divide them so they would willingly take arms and slay each other at his behest. Thus, on one hand he imprecated the deities of the Quraish with his rude and boorish slurs in order to excite them and incite them to hostility who would in turn react and harass his followers and make them feel wronged and victimized. On the other hand he forced his followers to endure the hardship of exile, abandon their homes and flee to a foreign land. As a consequence he put one group against the other, and caused his followers to feel persecuted. Now they were poor, sore and suffered. Muhammad needed that anger and bitterness to foster his own dominance over them and command their obedience. In order to rule, he had to divide.

In order to rule ignorant people and make them side with you, you have to give them an enemy. Nothing can make people rally around you more than a common foe. This is the oldest trick in the book, which has been used successfully by all dictators throughout the history of mankind.

Muhammad, boasted in the Quran “Makaroo va makara Allah. va Allah khyrul makereen” (3:54). (They deceived and Allah deceived them and Allah is the best of deceivers). But Muhammad was a master deceiver himself. He managed to create religious hate among people who despite their backwardness and bigotry never had evinced religious intolerance before. Now he had a group of supporters who were impoverished, discontent and angry. They were ready to fight for him and help him realize his dreams. Obedience to "God and his Apostle," became the watchword of Islam. And of course as usual Allah would reveal verses that give his Apostle total authority.

Whomsoever disobeyeth GOD AND HIS PROPHET; verily to him shall be the Fire of Hell; they shall be therein always, forever! (Q.72: 23)

Say: "Obey Allah and His Messenger": But if they turn back, Allah loveth not those who reject Faith. (3:32)

And obey Allah and the Messenger; that ye may obtain mercy. (3:132)

O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, (4:59)

All who obey Allah and the messenger are in the company of those on whom is the Grace of Allah,- (4:69)

Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger (5:92)

O ye who believe! Obey Allah and His Messenger, and turn not away from him when ye hear (him speak). (8:20)

O ye who believe! give your response to Allah and His Messenger, (8:24)

And obey Allah and His Messenger; (8:46)

The Believers, …. obey Allah and His Messenger. On them will Allah pour His mercy: (9:71)

They say, "We believe in Allah and in the messenger, and we obey": but even after that, some of them turn away: they are not (really) Believers (24:47)

It is such as obey Allah and His Messenger, and fear Allah and do right, that will win (in the end), (24:52)

Say: "Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: (24:54)

O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger, and make not vain your deeds! (47:33)

But if ye obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not belittle aught of your deeds: (49:14)

Establish regular prayer; practice regular charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. (58:13)

So obey Allah, and obey His Messenger: (64:12)

But those who disobey Allah and His Messenger and transgress His limits will be admitted to a Fire, to abide therein: And they shall have a humiliating punishment. (4:14)

 

for any that disobey Allah and His Messenger,- for them is Hell: they shall dwell therein for ever." (72:23)

They ask thee concerning (things taken as) spoils of war. Say: "(such) spoils are at the disposal of Allah and the Messenger (8:1)

This last verse makes it clear why that much emphasis in obeying Allah and his messenger needed. Of course Allah had no need for spoils of war. It was all for his messenger.

After enduring years of verbal abuse, the Quraish boycotted Muhammad and his supporters from commercial transactions. They even threatened to punish Muhammad if he did not stop insulting their gods, but no one was jailed or killed for his beliefs.

Muhammad barricaded himself with a group of his relatives, in a Quarter of Mecca known as She'b of Abu Talib. This self-imposed durance lasted about 3 years. During this time they would venture out only at the time of hajj and retreat once the pilgrimage was over. But in no time Quraish attacked that quarter. On the contrary they seemed quite happy that Muhammad was not in the streets shouting obscenities at their deities. Had the Quraish intended to persecute the Muslims or kill Muhammad, they had plenty of opportunities to do so. Yet no violence was used against the Muslims. Muhammad however did not have the same patience with those who did not agree with him. In Median he surrounded the Jewish quarters, cut the supply of water and food to them and after they surrendered, he massacred and banished thousands of them with no mercy.

Nonetheless, the Quraish was ever suspicious of Muhammad and his movements. They had heard that his followers were increasing in number in Medina. The tone of Muhammad’s message was of doom and gloom and his actions towards the Meccans were perceptibly hostile. It was natural to be apprehensive of his moves and watch him carefully. Their suspicions picked when they learned that the Prophet had a clandestine rendezvous at midnight with a conclave of the Pilgrims from Medina in Aqaba, at the outskirts of Mecca. Meccans were not at war with the people of Yathrib (Medina) but still the Medinans were foreigners. What Muhammad had to do with them? Why he was conspiring with outsiders and what was the purpose of his secret meeting with them in the middle of the night? We cannot blame the Quraish to be nervous and concerned for their own security. They saw that secret gathering an unwarrantable interference in the domestic affairs of their town.

This forced them to meet and confer with each other to gauge the gravity of the situation. The outcome of that meeting is not clear, yet it caused Muhammad to fear for his life and flee the town with his friend Abu Bakr.

Muhammad later recalls that moment and conjectures that perhaps they were plotting to detain him, or may be expel him or even slay him. But there is no evidence to prove any of those charges are true. Even Muhammad’s all-knowing god who spoke of this meeting seemed to know exactly what decisions were taken in that meeting. In the following verse Allah talks about that event and sys:

"And call to mind when the unbelievers plotted against thee, that they might detain thee, or slay thee, or expel thee. Yea, they plotted; but God plotted likewise. And God is the best of plotters." (Q.8: 29)

In Medina

After Muhammad and Abu Bakr fled to Medina, their families stayed behind for several weeks. But nothing befell them and the Quraish did not harm, accost or harass them in anyways. Although as Muir points out “it was not unreasonable that they should have been detained as hostages against any hostile incursion from Medina. These facts lead us to doubt the intense hatred and bitter cruelty, which the strong coloring of tradition is ever ready to attribute to the Quraish. In accordance with this view is the fact that the first aggressions, after the Hegira, were solely on the part of Mahomet and his followers. It was not until several of their caravans had been waylaid and plundered, and blood had thus been shed, that the people of Mecca were forced in self-defense to resort to arms”

The fact that Mohammad and Abu Bakr trusted that their families would be safe if left behind in Mecca is a clear indication that the hostilities attributed to the Quraish against the Muslims is an exaggeration and an excuse or a justification for their later invasion of Mecca. None of the Muslims were exiled. All of them emigrated by their own volition. A few of them were prevented from following Muhammad by their families and a few who were slaves were not allowed to escape before the payment of what their masters had paid for them. The rest joined Muhammad with no obstruction from the Quraish. This can hardly be called persecution.

When Muhammad reached Medina, there were about a couple of hundreds of emigrants and perhaps an equal number of Medinans of the tribes of Khazraj and Aus who had believed in him. The Meccans were unskilled people and found employment in the fields and plantations. They mostly worked as laborers and journeymen for the wealthy Jews. It was hard on them. The belief in Allah was good but it would not feed them. Muhammad was aware that he could not keep his followers for long if he failed to satisfy their earthly needs. Moreover he had made them immigrate for a purpose: to wage war for him and establish his dominance over Arabia and subdue the Persia.

However his small cluster of followers was unqualified for military tasks. Yet he had offered those who left their homes a goodly home in this world and it was time to deliver his promise or face sedition and defection. This is what he has promised them:

“To those who leave their homes in the cause of Allah, after suffering oppression,- We will assuredly give a goodly home in this world; but truly the reward of the Hereafter will be greater. If they only realized (this)!” (Q.16: 41)

Whence would he provide them all the goodly things he had offered them in this world? Certainly Allah would not be able to do send those goodly things from the heaven. That is when he had to put to action the plan that he had devised years earlier. Of course conquering Arabia and subduing the Persia was not possible with just a few disciples but raiding the merchant caravans and plundering their goods was possible.

 

The Prophet turns a bandit.

So the Prophet turns a bandit and thenceforth he ceased to preach, "Speak good to men..." 2: 83 or "Be patient with what they say, and part from them courteously".73: 10 and started to call for blood, “qateloo” (kill) became the buzzword of Allah’s subsequent messages.

During the first six months of Muhammad’s arrival to Medina, nothing important happened. The immigrants including Muhammad himself, had to struggle to make a living to pay for shelter and food.

However the thoughts of Mohammad were not thoughts of peace. He was a hurt man. No one can disregard and mock a narcissist and escape his wrath. Muhammad promised condign vengeance on those who belittled him and laughed at his claim.

He had plans, big plans. He was determined to prove his importance and rub it especially on the face or those who mocked him.The number of his followers was increasing. More of his Meccan disciples managed to escape their masters or their families and joined other immigrants and some accepted Islam in Medina. Now he was in a position to command a party of warriors.

But the people of Medina had pledged only to defend him from attacks and not to support him in his highway robberies. Therefore he had only the Meccan immigrants to work with in the early stages of his empire building.

In Dec. A.D. 622 during the month of Ramadhan, seven months after his arrival to Medina, Muhammad dispatched his uncle Hamza, at the head of thirty Refugees, to surprise a Meccan caravan returning from Syria under the guidance of Abul Hakam (the father of knowledge) whom Muhammad duped Abu Jahl (the father of ignorance). This caravan was guarded by some 300 men. Hamza’s men had to retreat empty handed to Medina and Abu Jahl proceeded onwards to Mecca. This was the first confrontation started by Muhammad, which was had a petty and marauding character and was aborted because of shortage of men and bad planning. The god, who told Muhammad to raid that caravan, did not tell him how to do it. The Prophet of Allah, had to learn the art of high way rubbery through trial and error, just like any greenhorn thief.

The next raid took place a month later in Jan. A.D. 623. At that time Muhammad sent another party, double the strength of the first one, under the command of Obeida, ibn Harith, in pursuit of another caravan protected by Abu Sofian with 200 men. This time the Quraish were ambushed while their camels were grazing by a fountain in the valley of Rabigh and some arrows were exchanged but the invaders retreated after realizing that their number is much less than the men in the caravan.

One month later, a third expedition started under the youthful Sa’d, ibn Abu Waqqas with twenty followers, in the same direction. He was directed to proceed as far as Kharrar, a valley on the road to Mecca, and to lie in wait for a caravan expected to pass that way. Like most of the subsequent marauding parties intended to affect a surprise, they marched by night and lay in concealment during the day. Notwithstanding this precaution, when they reached their destination in the fifth morning, they found that the caravan had passed a day before, and they returned empty-handed to Medina.

These excursions occurred in the winter and spring of the year 623 A.D. On each occasion, Muhammad mounted a white banner on a staff or lance, and presented it to the leader of the expedition, on his departure. The names of those who carried the standard, as well as the names of the leaders, in these and in all other expeditions of importance, are carefully recorded

In the summer and fall of the same year, Mahomet led in person three somewhat larger, though equally unsuccessful expeditions.

Nearly a year after his arrival at Median, in June, 623 AD he headed a party to Abwa, the spot where his mother lay buried, in pursuit of another caravan owned by the Quraishites. They missed the caravan. But Muhammad headed towards the Bani Dhamra, a tribe connected with Mecca and forced them to sign a peace treaty with him that they would not take the side of the Meccans. This was the first treaty that Muhammad entered into with any foreign tribe. This expedition lasted fifteen days.

Bowat:

In the succeeding month Muhammad headed 200 followers to Bowat, a place on the caravan route south-west of Medina. This time some Medinan Muslims also volunteered to join the party. This shows Muhammad was gaining influence among them because by then the number of the refugees from Mecca was less than a hundred. It also shows the strange values of the Arabs who did not see anything wrong in highway robbery and believed in Muhammad even though his actions were that of a marauding chieftain. 1400 years later, these barbaric values are not changed but they have now spread to other countries that fell under the domination of Islam. Civilized nations such as Iranians, who wrote the first declaration of human rights 1100 years before Islam, now under the influence of Islam, see no problem with robberies and even terrorism if that is done in the name of God.

A rich burden, laden on 2,500 camels, under the escort of Omeya ibn Khalf, (who was killed later in Badr) with 100 armed men, was to proceed by that road. But it eluded pursuit, and passed on in safety.

In this expedition not only Muhammad did not succeed, he actually lost a few camels when Kurz ibn Jabir, another marauding chieftain, more experienced than him stole some of the camels from the Muslims. Muhammad pursued him nearly to Badr, but he made good his escape. Kurz later converted to Islam and continued his marauding activities this time in the name of God.

Islam has always been the favorite religion of criminals and thugs. Today we have the prison inmates who convert to Islam. There are things that never changes.

Osheira,
In October of the same year (623 A.D) Mahomet launched his third expedition. 150 to 200 believers joined the party. They had no more than thirty camels, which they rode upon by turns. At Osheira, nine stages in the direction of Yenbo, in the vicinity of hill Rashwa they waited to intercept another rich caravan which Abu Sofian was conducting towards Syria.

Muhammad had spies everywhere. His men, acting as the fifth column informed him of what was going on in their homeland. He was tipped when a caravan left Mecca or was about to approach it and he prepared his men to attack it. .

But this caravan passed before he could reach the spot. Later on, this same caravan was raided by Muhammad’s men at Badr, when it was returning from Syria. The raid of Badr was a turning point in the marauding carrier of Muhammad and it is regarded as a big victory for Islam.

Again like in his previous failed expedition, Muhammad confronted two tribes, the Bani Mudlij who lived in the vicinity of Osheira and with the Bani Dhamra, and forced them to enter into peace treaty with him. The purpose of these peace treaties were to strengthen his political connection and his position. Later on Muhammad broke all peace treaties and all these tribes were forced to accept Islam and contribute to Muhammad’s power both financially and militarily.

 

Nakhlah the breakthrough

More than one year had past and despite several attempts and expeditions none of the holy Prophet's robberies were successful. The megalomaniac Messenger of Allah finally realized that he has to start with smaller targets and slowly build his way up. So when the news reached him of a small merchant caravan going from Mecca which was guarded by four men only, he seized the opportunity and sent Abdullah ibn Jahsh, with seven or eleven other immigrants, to hijack that caravan.

It was now the sacred month of Rajab, and it was a time-honoured Arab institution that in a sacred month there should be a truce between hostile tribes. During this period, men could go about unarmed and in peace. Obviously an armed force which set this custom at defiance had a good prospect of success, and success was now sorely needed by Muhammad and the Muslims. Mudariju'n-Nabuwat, p. 555;

Muhammad gave Abdullah a sealed letter telling him to open it after two days. The letter read: Advance in the name of God the most High and Glorious and, when thou arrivest by His blessing in the valley of Nakhla with thy companions, there look out 1for the caravan of the Quraish; because thou mayest probably derive profit therefrom. Nor must thou take any one against his will. Let those who like accompany thee and those remain who like to stay behind”

The men who went for the expedition had no knowledge of their mission until they unsealed the letter and read Muhammad’s instructions. The reason why Muhammad asked Abdullah not to open the letter until the third day was that had the expedition knew a priory the intent of the mission, i.e. raiding a caravan and killing in a sacred month, many of them might have hesitated and not have gone. But once they were on the third day of their trip, it was more likely that they would go ahead and carryout the instruction.

 

Upon hearing the instructions, two of them men, Sa’d and Utba conveniently lost their camels. They went in search of them and did not return.

The rest went to Nakhla a Valley between Mecca and Taif known for its date orchards and waited. In a short time a caravan laden with wine, raisins, and leather, came up. It was guarded by four Qureishits, who, seeing the strangers, were alarmed, and halted. To disarm their apprehension, one of Abdullah’s men shaved his head, in token that they were going for the lesser pilgrimage. The men of the caravan were thus reassured, and turning their camels adrift to pasture, began to prepare food. Then one of Abdullah’s men advanced; and discharging an arrow, killed a man of the convoy, on the spot. All then rushed upon the caravan, and took two of the guards as hostages. One man escaped. The Muslims took the hostages along with the goods stolen to Medina.

Upon arriving at Medina, the followers of Muhammad were disappointed for the envoy had violated a long-standing tradition of no hostility during the sacred months and this gave reason to Jews to further criticize Muhammad and reproached him saying: 'Muhammad and his followers make the unlawful lawful and shed blood and plunder in a sacred month.' This was embarrassing to the messenger of Allah and he pretended to be angry blaming the men for acting on their own and without his consent. He took the goods confiscated and jailed the men captured. But soon the resourceful Prophet received another verse from Allah who condoned the crime and completely justifies it:

"They will ask thee concerning the Sacred Months, whether they may war therein. SAY : - Warring therein is grievous; but to obstruct the way of God, and to deny him, and hinder men from the Holy Temple, and expel his people from thence, is more grievous with God. Tempting (to Idolatry) is more grievous than killing. They will not leave off to fight against you until they turn you from your faith, if that were ill their power; but whosoever amongst you shall turn back from his faith and die an Unbeliever, -verily their Works are rendered of no effect in this Life and in the next. These are the Dwellers in Hell, - for ever therein. But they that believe, and they who emigrate for the sake of their faith, and strive earnestly in the way of God, - let them hope in the mercy of God: for God is forgiving and merciful." (Q.2: 217)

After promulgating this verse and thus getting out of the difficulty Muhammad gave over the booty to the captors, who, after presenting a fifth of it to Muhammad, divided the remainder among themselves.

When party returned to Medina, Sa’d and Utba’s who had avoided the robbery by letting their camels lose, had not yet returned. Muhammad feared that they were captured by the Quraish and refused to ransom the captives till he was assured that no foul play had been used against them: - "if ye have killed my two men," he said, "verily, I will put yours also to death." But, soon after, they showed up, and Muhammad accepted the proffered ransom, - forty ounces of silver for each and released them. This success eliminated the danger of want and privation that Muhammad and his men faced.

Raiding merchant caravans, fighting during the holy months, deceiving and killing innocent people, stealing, taking humans as hostage, demanding ransom for their release, threatening to kill them, etc. are not acts that one would expect from a messenger of God. What Muhammad did was criminal. There can be no justification for that.

It was only then that Meccans realized that their opponent respected no rules and his savagery knew no bounds. This was the first expedition of Muslims where someone was killed. It is interesting to note that the first blood spelt in the cause of Allah belonged to an innocent caravan man and it was spelt by Muslims through treachery. In no time Muslims were victimized. They were always victimizers, the aggressors and provokers.

 

 

 

Ibn Hisham confirmed, "This was, the first booty that the Muslims obtained; the first captives they seized; the first life they took."

Muhammad designated Abdullah, the head of the bandits of Nakhah, with the distinction of Amir al Mominin, "Commander of the Faithful" an appellation that was assumed in after days by his successors, the Khalifas.

This attack showed that Muhammad and his followers would respect neither life nor the universally honored sacred months. Despite this flagrant act of hostility where a life was lost, the Quraish did not retaliate. Though some of the Muslims were still in Mecca, the Quraish attempted no cruelties or reprisals against them. This is in contrast with the Prophet’s way of punishing some for the faults of others. When his men captured the guards of the Caravan in Nakhlah, he was ready to kill the hostages because he suspected that his other lost followers were captured and killed by the Meccans. Even if that were true, how could a messenger of God put to death innocent people for the sins of others? However, the most horrendous act of Muhammad’s injustice is his massacre of all the men of Bani Quraiza in retaliation of one of them killing a Muslim who in turn had killed a Jew.

After the successful foray in Nakhlah, Muhammad increased his profitable marauding activities and became an expert in art of plundering and warfare. More caravans were attacked and more booty filled his coffers making his followers also wealthy. It was then that the messenger of Allah started to reveal verses encouraging fighting and killing.

"Bear good tidings unto the Righteous. Truly the Lord will keep back the Enemy from those who believe, for God loveth not the perfidious Unbeliever. Permission is granted unto those who take up arms for that they have been injuriously entreated; and verily the Lord is Mighty for the assistance of those who have been driven from their homes without just cause, - for no other reason than that they said, God is our Lord. And truly if it were not that God holdeth back mankind, one part of them by means of another part (Q.22: 41)

Notice how the holy Prophet is twisting the facts to rouse his followers into killing frenzy. As we saw Muslims were not “injuriously treated” and they were not driven from their homes. The Quraish did not persecute them for their belief in God. These inflammatory verses were unfounded. But he wanted to incite them to enlist in his army and help him realize his dream of conquering the Arabia and subduing the Ajam.

The treaty that was signed in Medina obliged the inhabitants of that town to protect Mohammad if he was attacked by the Meccans, but it did not require them to take part in offensive wars, plunder and enrich the prophet with spoils of war. Yet Muhammad needed their participation in his expeditions. The solution was found, as usual, in a revelation. If they did not listen to him, they would listen to Allah. Hence Allah often would speak for Muhammad to do what he pleased.

"War is ordained for you, even though it be irksome unto you. Perchance ye dislike that which is good for you, and love that which is evil for you. But God knoweth, and ye know not."

At this point we have to ask ourselves what makes a man a messenger of God if not his deeds and good conduct? In what ways Muhammad’s actions are different from those of the common thieves, the gangsters, the thugs, the hooligans, the hoodlums and the criminals?

 

An Important Question

I concluded my letter to Ayatollah Montazeri with the following notes:

Dear Ayatollah, in your letter you seemed to approve of what the Prophet did because the ends justified the means. You were not concerned at all that what he did was unethical, dishonest and ruthless because he was a messenger of God and because of that whatever he did, even though it was blatantly unjust was right.

The point is not who Muhammad was and what he did? Muhammad is dead and what he did is history. The point is who are WE? What can be said of a society that holds a thug, an assassin, and a thief as her spiritual guide? What can be said about us, our values and morals, when we hoist a man like Muhammad as our teacher? How can we aspire to become a spiritual society when our beloved Prophet was a thug? How can we ever establish humanistic values of tolerance, equality, justice and love when our spiritual leader had none of them? These are the questions that our nation must answer in this crucial moment of her existence. This is the first time after 1400 years of living under terror and being blindfolded that we have the chance to see for our selves, question and face the truth.

We are what we think and we think in accordance to what we believe. Can we ever become a peaceful, loving, advanced and civilized nation when we believe in a man that was a mass murderer, a liar, a pedophile, a thief, an assassin, a rapist, a lecher, a hatemonger and a prowling gangster? Can we ever have peace when our Prophet taught nothing but war? Can we ever tolerate each other and celebrate our differences when the man whom we want to emulate in everything, had nothing but scorn for those who did not agree with him? Can we ever respect the women of our society when our “infallible” guru, called them “deficient in intelligence”, “crooked ribs”, “calamities” and “domains of Satan”? Can we ever quench the hate that is burning in our hearts for the minorities among us when our messenger said that they are najis, should be killed, subdued, humiliated and fined? Can we ever love each other when our Prophet told us to hate? Isn’t it true that leaders should be ahead of their followers? How can we go forward, when our leader was so backward?

To know Islam, and the truth about it is ultimately to know who we are, why our history evolved the way it did and how we got here. The physicians know that once the cause of a disease is discovered, the cure is around the corner. It is time that we as a society pay attention to the cause of our malaise. Perhaps we can find our remedy around the corner.

 

 

 

 

 

Articles Op-ed Authors Debates Leaving Islam FAQ
Comments Library Gallery Video Clips Books Sina's Challenge
 

  ©  copyright You may translate and publish the articles in this site only if you provide a link to the original page.