Rebuttal to Ali Sina's article "Juwairiyah"

Rebuttal to Ali Sina's Article, "Juwairiyah"

Bassam Zawadi & Umar

This article is in response to Ali Sina's article "Juwairiyah," which can be accessed here.

Ali Sina said:

In the history of the Arabs that predates the arrival of Islam, never before had there been such wars, certainly none on the scale and magnitude of those that were instigated by Muhammad the founder of Islam. Previous battles in Arabia had mainly centered on tribal differences and were confined to bouts of squabbling with some fights. With the introduction of Islam came not only war, but also an unrelenting genocide and terror that would quickly become integral components in furthering Islam's expansionism.

The early years of Muhammad's prophetic carrier, in his native town Mecca, were peaceful. After 13 year of preaching no more than 70 or 80 people had embraced his cause. Not all of them were able fighting men. That explains why those early years were peaceful. Muslims did not have the strength to fight. However soon after Muhammad migrated and settled in Medina, and the Arab population of that town accepted his religion, he began invading and looting first the merchant caravans and then the human settlements to survive and to provide for his followers who had accompanied him and because of their lack of expertise had a difficult time finding employments in Medina.

Our Response:

When the Muslims migrated from Makkah to Medina, they left all their possessions in Makkah. Later on, the Quraysh took all the possessions of the Muslims in Makkah, and led by Abu Sufyan, they took all those possessions to Syria so that they could be sold. So, if Ali Sina is referring to the caravans that held Muslim belongings that were to be sold, then I see no problem that it was attacked. Let's ask Ali Sina if someone would take all his belongings in his house, then sell them, would Ali Sina sit quietly, and let people take his possessions and sell it? I don't think so. Let us also note that this was how the Battle of Badr began. (Note: It wasn't just one caravan; it was many, but The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) intercepted the caravan specifically led by Abu Sufyan mainly because it would deliver a big blow to the Meccan glory, and Abu Sufyan, who learned of these intentions, led his caravan out of the main route and inclined it towards the Red Sea. Abu Sufyan sent a messenger to the Quraysh, telling them:

O Quraysh! your merchandise! it is with Abu Sufyan. The caravan is being intercepted by Muhammad and his companions. I cannot say what would have happened to them. Help! Help! (Muhammad Husayn Haykal. Hayat Muhammad, Cairo 1974, pg. 256)

Also, I want to add that the Quraysh began to make preparations for an attack on Medina, which they believed would exterminate the nascent power of Islam. But before fighting the decisive battle, they were anxious to enlist the support and sympathies of the non-Muslim tribes living around Medina. (See: Abdul Hameed Siddiqui, The Life of Muhammad, peace be upon him, pp. 175-176).

Ali Sina states in his article that Muhammad (peace be upon him) attacked human settlements to survive and to provide for his followers "soon after" he migrated to Medina. I honestly don't know what his source is. If he is referring to the attacks on the surrounding tribes, then we'll get to that later on, Insha'Allah. But here is how Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) helped the Muhajirun (emigrants from Makkah) who left everything in Makkah:

Prayers being thus regulated, the Prophet next turned his attention to cementing the ties of brotherhood amongst the Muslims of Medina who were called Ansar, and the Muhajirun, i.e., emigrants from Mecca. It was a necessary step since the refugees who had left their hearths and homes and had said goodbye to friends and relatives were feeling lonely. To raise their feelings of loneliness, and to attune them to the changed circumstances, a new fraternity was established amongst the Muslims of Mecca and those of Medina.

This brotherhood was indeed unique in the history of the world. The fellow-feeling and love on which this new relationship was established found a wonderful expression. For example Sa'd b. Sabi a Helper said to his fellow brother 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Awf, " I am the richest man amongst the Helpers. I am glad to share my property half and half with you. I have two wives, I am ready to divorce one, and after the expiry of 'iddah, you may marry her." But 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Awf was not prepared to accept anything : neither property nor home. So he blessed his brothers and said : " Kindly direct me to the markets so that I may make my fortune with my own hands." The Helpers were extremely generous to their brethren-in-faith. They once approached the Holy Prophet with the request that their orchards should be distributed equally between the Muslims of Medina and their brethren from Mecca. But the Prophet however, decided that the refugees would work in the orchards along with the Helpers and the yield would be divided equally amongst them. (Abdul Hameed Siddiqui, The Life of Muhammad peace be upon him, p. 138-139).

Now, continuing with Ali Sina's argument:

Ali Sina said:

The fifth year of hijrah (migration to Medina) was an eventful year. That was the year that Muslims fought the famous war of the ditch against the Meccans and soon after that they surrounded the Jewish quarter of Bani Qaynuqa of Medina who were a prosperous population of goldsmiths and blacksmiths and after confiscating their properties (vineyards and homes) and belongings (jewelry and arms) they were banished from their ancestral home. After that he set his sight on another Jewish tribe, the Bani Nadir. He did a similar thing to them. He killed their leaders and many of their able-bodied men and after confiscating their properties and much of their wealth, expelled the rest from Medina. In neither of these cases the Jews offered any resistance. They were taken by surprise and simply surrendered under the superior forces of Muhammad's men.

Our Response:

Ali Sina is good at telling people about battles, but he never explains WHY the battles took place. So, let's take a trip down history lane and educate Ali Sina.

The Battle of Uhud had a number of effects on the enemies of Islam. They were, on the one hand, very much perturbed by the growing strength of Muslims, but the happenings in Uhud had, on the other hand, supplied fresh vigor to their drooping spirits, and they had begun to think of the extermination of the Divine Faith.

The Jews found a suitable opportunity to stab the Muslims in the back, who had already been hit hard in the Battle of 'Uhud. They perceived that their concentrated efforts could easily precipitate the ruin of Islam. The first treacherous act that they did was to open secret communications with the Quraysh, casting aside their agreements with the Muslims. Moreover, they strained every nerve to produce general dissatisfaction and bitterness against the Holy Prophet, his teachings, and faithful companions. A campaign of slander was organized against Islam and its followers. The sacred words of the Holy Qur'an were deliberately mispronounced in order to pervert their meanings. Satirical poems were enthusiastically sung at public places in which the religion of Allah was abjectly ridiculed. Muslim ladies were insulted and offended by obscene and amatory madrigals. Inflammatory poems were recited with a view to keeping this animosity of the hostile tribes alive.

Life was thus made hard for the followers of Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Holy Prophet was keeping a watch over their seditious activities. He first approached the tribe of Qaynuqa and asked them to honor the pact which they had concluded with him. But they did not pay heed to his advice. They had become over-confident in their power since they had been assured help from other tribes. Their reply was defiant and they betook themselves into fortified strongholds. The Prophet laid siege to them and kept it for fifteen days, after which they became entirely helpless for want of any external help and thus surrendered themselves. The Prophet then ordered them to leave Medina and settle somewhere else. Thus banished, they went to Khaybar and settled there.

Similar was the treatment meted out to Banu Nadir another important Jewish tribe. They were likewise forced to leave their homes as they had not only refused to renew the pact of peace, but had made an attempt on the life of the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). ( Abdul Hameed Siddiqui, The Life of Muhammad peace be upon him, p. 200).

Recommended Readings

http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2005/the-expulsion-of-banu-al-nadir/

http://www.faithfreedom.com/ali_sina_exposed/truth_about_jews.htm

Now, let's continue...

Ali Sina said:

Emboldened by his victories over these weaker, non-combative and non-threatening people who agreed to give up their wealth in exchange for their lives and goaded by an insatiable greed and his lust for power this self styled messenger of Allah then set his eyes upon other Jewish tribes of Arabia living outside of Medina. This time it was the turn of Bani al-Mustaliq.

Our Response:

Now again, Ali Sina is referring to them as " non-combative and non-threatening." But he has already been exposed as a liar and deceiver regarding Islamic history. Now Ali Sina is saying that it is Bani Al-Mustaliq's turn. But it was Bani Al-Mustaliq who FIRST started. Read the following:

News reached the Prophet [peace be upon him] on Sha'ban 2nd. to the effect that the chief of Bani Al-Mustaliq, Al-Harith bin Dirar had mobilised his men, along with some Arabs, to attack Madinah. Buraidah bin Al-Haseeb Al-Aslami was immediately despatched to verify the reports. He had some words with Abi Dirar, who confirmed his intention of war. He later sent a reconnoiterer to explore the positions of the Muslims but he was captured and killed. The Prophet [peace be upon him] summoned his men and ordered them to prepare for war. Before leaving, Zaid bin Haritha was mandated to see to the affairs of Madinah and dispose them. On hearing the advent of the Muslims, the disbelievers got frightened and the Arabs going with them defected and ran away to their lives. Abu Bakr was entrusted with the banner of the Emigrants, and that of the Helpers went to Sa'd bin 'Ubada. The two armies were stationed at a well called Muraisi. Arrow shooting went on for an hour, and then the Muslims rushed and engaged with the enemy in a battle that ended in full victory for the Muslims. Some men were killed, women and children of the disbelievers taken as captives, and a lot of booty fell to the lot of the Muslims. Only one Muslim was killed by mistake by a Helper. Amongst the captives was Juwairiyah, daughter of Al-Harith, chief of the disbelievers. The Prophet [peace be upon him] married her and, in compensation, the Muslims had to manumit a hundred others of the enemy prisoners who embraced Islam, and were then called the Prophet's in-laws. [Za'd Al-Ma'ad 2/112,113; Ibn Hisham 2/289,290,294,295]

This was also narrated by Aasim bin Amr bin Qutada and collected by Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani in Fathul Bari (496/7).

They were all eventually set free. Taken from http://www.islamonline.com/cgi-bin/news_service/profile_story.asp?service_id=1110:

Although Juwayriyya was young and beautiful and of noble lineage, Prophet Mohamed (PEACE BE UPON HIM) was not thinking of all that, he was thinking of how to save her and all her tribe from an ignoble fate.

By marrying Juwayriyya, the Banu Mustaliq were able to enter Islam with honor, and with the humiliation of their recent defeat removed, and it was not necessary for them to embark on a war of vengeance that would have continued until one of the two parties had been annihilated.

All the booty that had been taken from the Banu Mustaliq was returned, and all the captives were set free, as soon as the marriage took place, for they were now the in laws of Prophet Mohamed (PEACE BE UPON HIM).

Let's continue...

Ali Sina said:

Bukhari, the great biographer of Muhammad, narrates the attack on Bani al-Mustaliq in the following story (Hadith)

"Narrated Ibn Aun:
I wrote a letter to Nafi and Nafi wrote in reply to my letter that the Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day. Nafi said that Ibn 'Umar had told him the above narration and that Ibn 'Umar was in that army." Volume 3, Book 46, Number 717:

This same Hadith is recorded in the Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4292, which validates the claim of its authenticity.

Our Response:

Ali Sina posts a hadith (saying of the Prophet), but we have already given the reasons for war. It was hostility from the other side. So it doesn't matter what the Hadith says if they are taken by surprise.

Taken from http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Articles/companion/04_abu_bakr.htm:

The Banu Mustaliq, a branch of Banu Khuza'a occupied the territory of Qadid on the Red Sea shore between Jeddah and Rabigh. In 527 C.E. news was brought to Madina that the Banu Mustaliq in alliance with some other tribes were gathering to make a raid on Madina. The policy of the Holy Prophet was that the Muslims should not lose the initiative in such cases, and should take such tribes by surprise. Another aspect of the policy was that action against individual tribes should be taken before they could effect an alliance.

Ali Sina said:

Muhammad molded his religion after Judaism and had great expectations that the Jews would be the first to heed his call. Nevertheless, to his chagrin, the Jews had no interest in his religion and he never forgave them for that. You cannot reject a narcissist without invoking his rage. Muhammad was so upset that he changed the direction of the Qiblah (the direction towards which the Muslims pray) from Jerusalem to Kaaba, which at that time was just a temple of idols and said Allah transformed the Jews were transformed into apes and swine because of their transgression (Q. 5:60) and (Q. 2:65). Muhammad made the Jews the scapegoat to rally his followers around himself. He was an expert of that old trick known as "divide n' conquer". The Arabs of Medina were generally a bunch of illiterate folk with little skills and often poor who made their living by working in the vineyards of the Jews and rendering other services to them. They where originally immigrants from Yemen while the Jews were the masters of trades and the owners of the lands who had called Medina home, for 2000 years. They were easy targets. Prowling their wealth and making more money by enslaving their women and children and distributing them among the poor Arabs while giving them the assurance that killing their masters and bread givers is not only ethical but also sanctioned by God proved a very lucrative enterprise for Muhammad, one that would change his fortunes, and set this new religion on its eventual path of war and military conquests.

Our Response:

Ali Sina has now stated that due to anger, the Qibla was changed!! In fact, the change in the Qibla wasn't out of anger. The changing of the Qibla exposed the hypocrites who used to pray with the Muslims, who were Jews. Since they were facing Jerusalem, the Jews had no problems praying, but now that they were facing the Kaaba so, they stopped their prayer and were exposed as Munafiqs as Hypocrites.

You can read more about the Qibla issue here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qibla_al-Qudsiyya

http://www.islamonline.net/livefatwa/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=Ce64KQ

Ali Sina then goes back to his old arguments as to how Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) attacked the Jews. He has already been refuted above regarding the tribes and the reasons why they were attacked.

Ali Sina said:

Muhammad sent one of his companions; Bareeda bin Haseeb, to spy on the Bani al-Mustaliq and after assessing the situation he ordered his men to attack. Muslims came out of Madina on 2nd Shaban of 5 A.H. and encamped at Muraisa, a place at a distance of 9 marches from Medina.

Our Response:

There is nothing wrong with that, just war tactics being implemented.

Ali Sina said:

The following quote from an Islamic site states:

"The news of the advance of Muslim forces had already reached Haris. In panic, his men deserted him and he himself took refuge in some unknown place. But the local population of Muraisa took up arms against the Muslims and rained showers of arrows in a sustained manner. The Muslims launched a sudden and furious attack and routed the enemy, who suffered huge casualties and nearly 600 were taken prisoners by the Muslims. Among the booty there were 2,000 camels and 5,000 goats.
The prisoners of war included Barra, the daughter of Haris, who later on became Hazrat Juwairiyah, the consort of the Holy Prophet. According to the prevailing practice all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers. Hazrat Juwairiyah fell to the lot of Thabit bin Qais. She was the daughter of the leader of the clan, and therefore, very much felt the discomfiture and disgrace of being made slave of an ordinary Muslim soldier. Therefore, she requested him to release her on payment of ransom. Thabit agreed to this, if she could pay him 9 Auqias of gold. Hazrat Juwairiyah had no ready money with her. She tried to raise this amount through contributions, and approached the Holy Prophet also in this connection. She said to him "0' Prophet of Allah! I am the daughter of Al Haris bin Zarar, the Lord (chief) of his people. You know that it is by chance that our people have fallen captive and I have fallen to the share of Thabit bin Qais and have requested him to release me considering my status, but he has refused. Please do an act of kindness and save me from humiliation". The Holy Prophet was moved and asked the captive woman if she would like a thing still better. She asked as to what was that thing. He said that he was ready to pay her ransom and marry her if she liked. She agreed to this proposal. So the Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) paid the amount of ransom and married her."

The above is the story how Muhammad married Juwairiyah as recorded by Muslim historians. Interestingly Muhammad makes his Allah praise him with verses such as the following: "And surely thou hast sublime morals" (Quran 68:4). and "Indeed in the Messenger of Allah you have a good example to follow" (Quran 33:21). The question that begs an answer is; was he really the standard of sublime morals and good example to follow?

Our Response:

Ali Sina tries to portray his marriage to Juwayriyya as bad, but watch how he shoots himself in the foot later on.

Ali Sina said:

First he attacks a population without warning and only because they were easy targets and wealthy. As usual he kills the unarmed able-bodied men, plunders their belongings, then enslaves the rest. Is this behavior befitting of a messenger of God? The narrator says, "According to the prevailing practice all the prisoners were made slaves and distributed among the victorious Muslim soldiers." As we read the history of Islam, we see this WAS indeed the prevailing practice of the Muslim Mujahedin, throughout the bloody history of Islam. Yet the question remains unanswered. Is this how a messenger of God should behave? In another place Muhammad called himself the mercy of God for all the worlds 21:107 . What is the difference between this "mercy of God" and a ruthless marauding gangster and a tyrant? If Muhammad were not the "mercy of God" and if he were not "a good example to follow", how else would he have then behaved?

Our Response:

Surah 2:190

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors.

Surah 8:61

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things)

Surah 5:28

"If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear God, the cherisher of the worlds.

Surah 2:193

"And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers.

Surah 60:8-9

God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for God loveth those who are just. God only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.

The Prophet Muhammad's actions were always according to the Quran. So, saying he killed all the "unarmed able-bodied men" is a clear-cut lie!

Now, Ali Sina has reverted to name-calling and has declared the Prophet Muhammad a " gangster and tyrant." While he has already been refuted as to why these wars happened (they were an act of defense), let's continue with the response.

Ali Sina said:

If this was the prevailing practice of the Arabs, couldn't the messenger of God change it? Why engage in such a barbaric practice at all? Did he not say that his is the example to follow? Why should a man with such a claim behave in so brutal a fashion? Was he merely following the customs of his people or was he attempting to set an example for them to follow?

It is very clear that Muhammad was not "moved" by compassion but by lust. Muhammad did not set free Juwairiyah because he felt sorry for her. He was a man incapable of such feelings. He wanted Juwairiyah for himself. And this is the man 1.2 billion people follow as the perfect example and a messenger of God.

Our Response:

If a person starts a war with you, and it has been CONFIRMED that they are ready to attack you, and you just sit down and do nothing, it makes you a HORRIBLE leader. I wonder, if Ali Sina ever became president, what would he do? Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) protected the Ummah from the enemies, who were ready to fight the Muslims. He didn't attack for no reason at all, so Ali Sina should get his facts straight.

Now, Ali Sina has come to his main point for writing the article, Juwairiyah. So first, I will post his arguments and then respond.

Ali Sina said:

Unlike what most people may think, Muhammad's intentions were not to convert people to his religion. His real aim was power, wealth and domination. Religion was just the pretext he used to subdue and conquer those he first sought to have dominion over. He weighed each case differently and considered its financial benefits. In most cases it was more profitable if the people did not convert to Islam, but killed and their belongings taken as spoils of war and their wives and children enslaved and soled with huge profits. This could bring sudden wealth to this "messenger of God" that otherwise he could not have. If people were given the choice they could have feared defeat and the harsh consequences and they could have accepted Islam. This would have impeded Muslims of looting them, which meant loss of profit. That is why Muhammad did not deem appropriate to warn the Bani Mustaliq just as he never warned his other victims but attacked them by surprise.

Our Response:

How funny is this! Ali Sina likes the idea of telling someone they are going to be attacked, and that too by the opposing side! The main point in attacking by surprise is to SURPRISE! And again, coming to the wars, I gave the reasons why they were attacked above.

Ali Sina said:

Muslim, another biographer of Muhammad narrates:

Ibn 'Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi' inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before meeting them in fight. He wrote (in reply) to me that it was necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith. Nafi' said that this tradition was related to him by Abdullah b. Umar who (himself) was among the raiding troops." Book 019, Number 4292:

Our Response:

So what if the Prophet first asked them to accept Islam??? Its not that they didn't accept Islam, that he attacked, it was because the tribes showed hostility , and were ready to attack the Muslims first as I have shown above.

We also have to see how the Prophet (peace be upon him) eventually set the Banu Mustaliq free. Taken from http://www.islamonline.com/cgi-bin/news_service/profile_story.asp?service_id=1110:

Although Juwayriyya was young and beautiful and of noble lineage, Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) was not thinking of all that, he was thinking of how to save her and all her tribe from an ignoble fate.

By marrying Juwayriyya, the Banu Mustaliq were able to enter Islam with honor, and with the humiliation of their recent defeat removed, and it was not necessary for them to embark on a war of vengeance that would have continued until one of the two parties had been annihilated.

All the booty that had been taken from the Banu Mustaliq was returned, and all the captives were set free, as soon as the marriage took place, for they were now the in laws of Prophet Mohamed (PBUH).

Ali Sina said:

Muslim warriors carried on this sunnah (examples set by Muhammad) after his death.

When a Muslim army invaded a town, they would not allow anyone to convert to Islam for three days. During these three days they could kill as many men as they liked, pillage their properties, then rape and enslave their women and children. Only after a town had been decimated and all the young women and children that could be sold as slaves were captured would the brutal campaign of Islamization, with its brutal mandate that all must convert or die, began. However the Jews and the Christians were given protection to live provided they pay a penalty tax called Jizyah and enter into dhimmitude. Dhimmi means protected. But the dhimmis had to pay a hefty jizyah for their protection. This Jizyah was the source of livelihood of the Muslims who through it were able to live like parasites off the labor of the dhimmis. The following Hadith, reported by Bukhari, records the source for this practice based on the admonitions of Muhammad toward the dhimmi:

Narrated Juwairiya bin Qudama At-Tamimi:
We said to 'Umar bin Al-Khattab, oh Chief of the believers! Advise us." He said, "I advise you to fulfill Allah's Convention (made with the Dhimmis) as it is the convention of your Prophet and the source of the livelihood of your dependents (i.e. the taxes from the Dhimmis.) " Volume 4, Book 53, Number 388:

Our Response:

Noble Verse 25:68: "Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; - and any that does this (not only) meets punishment."

The Muslim army isnt supposed to kill an innocent person, as shown in the above Ayat. They only strike the ones who strike at them, meaning they strike at the Army not the Civilians, get your facts straight Ali Sina.

Coming to Jizyah, the people who are under Muslim rule, the Non-Muslim, have to pay Jizya. Here is a definition of Jizya:

"Jizyah: the root meaning is compensation.......there were exemptions for the poor, for females and children (according to Abu Hanifah), for slaves, and for monks and hermits. Being a tax on able-bodied males of military age, it was in a sense a commutation for military service." (The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an [1]. Foot Note #1281, page 445)

However, Sina tries to make this look one-sided. Muslims also pay even greater amounts, but under another name, Zakah. For an apostate of Islam, we would expect Ali Sina to at least know that!

Recommended Reading

http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/is_the_jizya_tax_oppressive__

Ali Sina said:

Continuing the story of Juwairiyah, Aisha who accompanied the prophet on this expedition related:

"when the prophet-peace be upon him- distributed the captives of Banu Almustaliq, she (Barrah) fell to the lot of Thabit ibn Qyas. She was married to her cousin, who was killed during the battle. She gave Thabit a deed, agreeing to pay him nine okes of gold for her freedom. She was a very beautiful woman. She captivated every man who saw her. She came to the prophet-peace be upon him-, to ask for his help in the matter. As soon as I saw her at door of my room, I took a dislike to her, for I knew that he would see her as I saw her. She went in and told him who she was, the daughter of al-Harith ibn Dhirar, the chief of his people. She said: "you can see the state to which I have been brought. I have fallen to the lot of Thabit, and have given him a deed for ransom, and I have to come to ask your help in the matter.' He said: 'would you like something better than that? I will discharge your debt, and marry you.' she said: 'yes. O then it is messenger of Allah! Done.' he replied." http://66.34.76.88/alsalafiyat/juwairiyah.htm

This story ends any further arguments about to the real motives of Muhammad in marrying only the young and beautiful women. As it can be seen Muhammad murders the husband of Juwairiyah, who was also her cousin. Captivated by her beauty, he offers to free her, but only on the condition she marry him. After having come to Muhammad to plead for his help, this self declared Messenger of God, this self proclaimed "mercy of God for humanity", this self styled "example to follow" by all the Muslims presents her with a most unwelcome choice, for whose price is that she must surrender her freedom. What other choice could there possibly be for her? Muslims apologetics insists that most of Muhammad's wives were widows. They try to give the impression Muhammad married them as an act of charity. However as it becomes clear these women were young and beautiful. If they were widows, is because Muhammad murdered their husbands. Juwairiyah was just 20 years old then while Muhammad was 58.

Our Response:

Ali Sina said that the Prophet only married the young and beautiful. That is not true; the Prophet married Khadija when she was 40 and he was 25. Khadija was widowed twice before she married the Prophet.

The Prophet also married Sauda bint Zuma when she was 50 years old, and she was a widow. She was also not an attractive woman.

Ibn Kathir says:

There was great surprise in Mecca that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would choose to marry a widow who was neither young nor beautiful. (Ibn Kathir, Wives of the Prophet Muhammad (SAW), Source)

So that destroys Ali Sina's argument that the Prophet only married young and beautiful women (even though there is absolutely nothing wrong with that).

As for the wisdom behind the marriage:

The aim of the Messenger of Allah to marry Juwayriyah was mainly to propagate and extend the word of Monotheism to every corner. Even though Juwayriyah was beautiful, and some of the Prophet's wives were even more beautiful, the criteria for marriage, according to the Islamic legal system, must not be based on one's physical beauty only.

Choosing a wife from the Muslim women should be based on the good Deen and good morals. Imam Bukhari, Muslim, and others reported that the Prophet (S.A.W.) said, "The woman is sought for marriage because of four reasons: her wealth, her noble family, her beauty and her Deen (religion). Marry the one who has a good Deen (religion); you will succeed."

We all know that Juwayriyah was the daughter of the leader of her tribe and she was part of Thabit bin Qay's booty. She bargained for her freedom, but because of her nobility and that of her father, Thabir asked her to pay an exorbitant sum of money as a ransom. She asked the Prophet to help her, and he did by paying her ransom and then marrying her.

Had it been that the Prophet wanted her for her beauty, he would have selected her before distributing the booty. However, the Prophet's marriage to her as far beyond that. It was for a noble cause, to influence her tribe to embrace Islam.

So, it was a noble cause the Prophet had in mind. He did all this to attain people's support, attracting their attention to his call and seeing different tribes responding to it, and these objectives were achieved. In light of this, the Prophet catered only for the interest of Islam and not self-prejudice or personal aspiration to satisfy any sexual desire as misconceived by orientalists and westerners.

The Prophet's marriage to Juwayriyah was graced and blessed by Allah, because of the sincerity that characterized the Prophet's act. Moreover, the intended objective was achieved as all the members of Banu al-Mustalaq, including Juwayriyah's father, embraced Islam.

Could this have happend if Juwayriyah had remained in the captive of Thabit ibn Qays?! (Muhammad Fathi Mus'ad, The Wives of the Prophet Muhammad: Their Strives and Their Lives, pp. 151-152)

The Prophet's marriage with Juwairiyah was a marriage which strengthened relations with the tribe, and ended hostilities. (Abdul Hameed Siddiqui, The Life of Muhammad PBUH, p. 42).

The same is true of the Prophet's marriage to Saffiyah and Mamuna (May Allah Almighty always be pleased with them).

Continuing with the article...

Ali Sina said:

Interestingly, the name of Juwairiyah was originally Barra (Pious). Apparently Muhammad did not like this name and so changed her name to Juwairiyah. Even the two Zeinabs who were his wives were previously called Barra and he changed their names as well to Zeinab, It would appear the Prophet had some guilt in becoming sexually intimate with women that were called "Pious". These seemingly incidental incidents reflect a certain hitherto humanity, a conscience, if you will, to his character, and perhaps hint at his own real, but hidden religiosity. Muhammad was certainly convinced of his own cause. However his understanding of reality was distorted as he had difficulty to distinguish between what is real and what is imagined. In fact Muhammad was more motivated by fear and superstitions than by conscience and ethics.

Our Response:

Because Ali Sina provides no evidence for his sick interpretation, it should be ignored. Let's examine the real reason why the Prophet changed her name.

Saheeh Muslim

Book 025, Hadith Number 5334.

Ibn Abbas reported that the name of Juwairlya (the wife of the Holy Prophet) was Barra (Pious). Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) changed her name to Juwairiya and said: I did not like that it should be said: He had come out from Barra (Pious). The hadith transmitted on the authority of Ibn Abi 'Umar is slightly different from it.

The explanation of this hadith could be found by looking at the other hadiths regarding Zaynab.

The same issue with Zaynab could be found in these hadiths:

Saheeh Bukhari

Volume 008, Book 073, Hadith Number 212.

Narated By Abu Huraira : Zainab's original name was "Barrah," but it was said' "By that she is giving herself the prestige of piety." So the Prophet changed her name to Zainab.

And:

Saheeh Muslim

Book 025, Hadith Number 5337.

Muhammad b. 'Amr b. 'Ata' reported: I had given the name Barra to my daughter. Zainab, daughter of Abu Salama, told me that Allah's' Messenger (may peace be upon him) had forbidden me to give this name. (She said): I was also called Barra, but Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Don't hold yourself to be pious. It is God alone who knows the people of piety among you. They (the Companions) said: Then, what name should we give to her? He said: Name her as Zainab.

Ali Sina said:

The rest of the story of Juwairiyah is mixed with half-truths and exaggerations, in the manner that have tainted most of the Hadiths. We read:

It is said that when the Prophet-peace be upon him- departed from the raid with Juwairiyah and was at Dhuljaysh, he entrusted her to one of the Ansar and went forward to Madinah. Her father, al-Harith, discovered that she was held captive and went back o Madinah, bringing his daughter's ransom. When he reached al-Aqia, he looked at the camels he had brought as her ransom and admired the two of them greatly, so he hid them in one of the passes of al-Aqia. Then he came to the Prophet-peace be upon him- dragging the camels behind him, and told him: "My daughter is too noble to be taken as a captive. Set her free by this ransom." the Prophet-peace be upon him- replied: "Isn't it better that we let her choose her self?" that is fair enough," said al-Harith. He came to his daughter and said: "This man is letting you chose so do not dishonor us!" "I choose Allah's messenger," she replied calmly. "What a disgrace!" he exclaimed.

The Prophet-peace be upon him-, then said "where are two camels which you have hidden in al-Aqia in such -and- such a pass?" al-Harith exclaimed: "I bear witness that there is no God but Allah, and that you Muhammad are the messenger of Allah! For none could have know of this but Allah."

Ibn-i-S'ad in his 'Tabaqat', states that the father of Juwairiyah paid her ransom amount, and when she became free, the Holy Prophet married her. As a result of this marriage a11 the prisoners of war numbering about 600 were freed by the Muslims as they did not like that any member of the family in which the holy Prophet was married, be made a slave."

Our Response:

Now read this carefully and how his own reference shoots him in the foot:

Ibn-i-S'ad in his 'Tabaqat', states that the father of Juwairiyah paid her ransom amount, and when she became free, the Holy Prophet married her. As a result of this marriage, all the prisoners of war, numbering about 600, were freed by the Muslims as they did not like that any member of the family in which the holy Prophet was married be made a slave."

Ali Sina doesn't believe in God. He rejects religion. Yet the reference he uses SHOWS that the Prophet Muhammad (S) knew something that no one except Al-Harith knew, making it a miracle. So he makes this comment:

"The rest of the story of Juwairiyah is mixed with half-truths and exaggerations in the manner that has tainted most of the Hadiths."

This just shows how desperate and inconsistent Ali Sina is in his arguments. He uses hadith when he thinks that it helps his causes and rejects them when it goes against him.

What a shame indeed!

Ali Sina said:

It is hard to determine which part of these stories is true and which part is not. However, what is not so difficult to notice are the many contradictions contained within the main storyline. For instance, we read that Muhammad paid the ransom to Thabit the captor of Juwairiyah, and then married her after freeing her. Then we read that Hairth, the father of Juwairiyah also paid the ransom to set her free. As to the claims of Muhammad having some sort of psychic power, that empowered him to know or tell certain things in advance, for instance knowing certain information such as the whereabouts of camels, we can safely conclude that these claims are false. On many occasions Muhammad demonstrated precisely the opposite, and proved that he was by no means psychic, let alone prescient, as he failed to discern or to obtain through divine blessings the information he so desired. For instance, when he raided Khaibar, he tortured the treasurer of that town, even to the point of death, just so he could extract from him the information that would lead to the whereabouts of the city's treasures

Our Response:

I will help Ali Sina to determine which part of the story is true and which isn't.

Taken from http://muslims.ws/win/biographies/bio-Jawairiah.html:

But according to another story, which is more probable, after the arrest of his daughter, Haris the father of Hazrat Juwairiyah, approached the Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) and asserted that "his daughter could not be made a slave, as she was the daughter of the tribal chief, and that she should be freed". The Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) said that "Would it not be better to leave the matter on the choice of his daughter". Haris then went to his daughter and told her that the Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) had left the matter to her free will, and hoped that she would not bring disgrace to him. The prisoner replied that she preferred to remain in the services of the Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam). Thereafter the Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) married her. Ibn-i-S'ad in his 'Tabaqat', states that the father of Hazrat Juwairiyah paid her ransom amount, and when she became free, the Holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) married her. As a result of this marriage all the prisoners of war numbering about 600 were freed by the Muslims as they did not like that any member of the family in which the holy Prophet (sallal alaho alahie wasallam) was married, be made a slave.

So, the second one is correct. It's funny how you post a Miracle by the Prophet and then say it isn't accurate.

Now, Sina is talking about the Battle of Khaibar and how the Prophet tortured the treasurer of Khaibar. First of all, this narration has been proven to be weak. See this.

Secondly, the Quran stresses the good treatment of the captive:

Surah 76:7-9

"They perform (their) vows, and they fear a Day Whose evil flies far and wide. And they feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive -- (Saying), 'We feed you For the sake of Allah alone: No reward do we desire from you, nor thanks.' (The Noble Quran, 76:7-9)"

As we can see, Muslims are told to treat captives with kindness. And if whatever references you are using contradict the Quran, they are dismissed according to the Islamic Scholar Mulla 'Ali al-Qari in his book Al-Maudu'at and all the other scholars. For more information on the treatment of captives, please read:

http://www.islamonline.net/english/introducingislam/politics/System/article05.shtml

http://muslim-canada.org/pow.html

http://www.answering-christianity.com/prisoners_of_war.htm

Ali Sina said:

It is important to understand the character of the Arab peoples. In this particular instance it was the Arabs who exhibited higher moral standards than their prophet. They released the relatives of Juwairiyah after they learned that Muhammad had married her. Muhammed was devoid of common decency, of having or showing even a hint of the virtues reflective of a moral leader. Without any empathy for those whose misfortune it was to become his victim.

Muslims claim that Juwairiyah became a very devout believer and would spend all of her days praying. The source of this claim can be found in the book Usud-ul-Ghaba. There the author writes that whenever the Prophet used to come to Juwairiyah he would find her praying, then when he would return at a later time he still found her praying. One day he said to her: "Shall I tell you few words, if you say them they will be heavier in the scale than what you have done? You say: 'subhaana allahe 'adada khalqihi, subhana allahe ridhaa nafsehe, subhana allahe zinata 'arshehe, subhana allahe zinata 'arshehe,subhana allah midadda kalimaatihi.' (Praise Allah as many times as number of his creatures, and as much as pleases him, and as much as the weight of his throne, and as much as the ink for his words).

One wonders why Muslims spend 5 times a day praying and waste that much man hours unproductively when they have such a simple and unbeatable formula to praise Allah?

Our Response:

Muslims pray 5 times a day to get closer to God. We pray to ask for forgiveness. The Prophet did not say that uttering such a statement is enough and the only thing required from us. Obviously, it does not have the same effect as praying 5 times a day to the person. Yes, it is a great reward to utter that statement but there is more required of us to do. That statement does bring great rewards but does not give the individual the complete benefits of getting closer to God.

In addition, this is not only found in Usud-ul- Ghaba, it is also found in:

Saheeh Muslim

Book 035, Hadith Number 6575.
------------------------------
Chapter : The reciting of Subhan Allah in the morning and at the time of sleeping.

Juwairiya reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) came out from (her apartment) in the morning as she was busy in observing her dawn prayer in her place of worship. He came back in the forenoon and she was still sitting there. He (the Holy Prophet) said to her: You have been in the same seat since I left you. She said: Yes. Thereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: I recited four words three times after I left you and if these are to be weighed against what you have recited since morning these would outweigh them and (these words) are: "Hallowed be Allah and praise is due to Him according to the number of His creation and according to the pleasure of His Self and according to the weight of His Throne and according to the ink (used in recording) words (for His Praise)."

Ali Sina said:

Let us look at this situation from a more realistic perspective. Put yourself in the shoes of a young woman who has just fallen into the lot of a murderer of her husband who also happened to be her cousin! As relatives, they grew up together. They were more than just husband and wife. They were first playmates, then lovers and companions for life. If you were a woman in Juwairiyah's situation, how would you feel about the killer of your husband and many of your relatives and loved ones? Suppose further you don't have anywhere to go to. Without any viable options for escape, your only choice would be to surrender as a sex slave to this old man, one who is the king of his people and has plenty of money or to be given away to one of his soldiers. Under whose captivity would you rather be? I believe the answer is clear. Juwairiah had no choice but to accept Muhammad's offer to marry her. Now what would any woman do if such an old man as this came to her for sex or company? She probably would devise a survival ploy. That is what Juwairiyah did. Any time she noticed Muhammad is coming, she pretended that she was busy praying, hoping that he would leave her and go to his other wives to satisfy his wretched lust. Yet, as we see, Muhammad was a cunning old man. He soon prescribed a sentence and told her that this "will be heavier in the scale" than praying all day long, robbing her from excuses to shun him when he desired her.

Our Response:

Juwairiyah chose to stay with the Prophet (peace be upon him) or leave him. The choice is either to "disgrace" her father or not to disgrace him. She willingly stayed with the Prophet (peace be upon him)), so she wasn't under any compulsion, as you blindly state. Now you assume that anytime Juwairiyah saw the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)) she pretended to pray! Ali Sina needs to argue with facts and not by assumption.

Not only that, why did Juwayriyah remain a Muslim even after the Prophet's death? Marawan ibn al-Hakam, the governor of Madinah was ordered by Mu'awiyah to perform the Funeral Prayer for Juwayriyah. (Ibn al-'Imad, Shadharat adh- Dhahab, vol. 1, p. 56) In Islam, we don't pray funeral prayers for non-Muslims, so this shows that she remained a Muslim.

Conclusion

So all Ali Sina did in his article was deceive people into thinking that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)) attacked the tribes for wealth, money, etc. While the Prophet (peace be upon him)) did that only because the tribes showed hostility towards the Muslims first.

We pray that Ali Sina becomes an objective thinker and returns to Islam.

Return to Refuting Faithfreedom.org

Return to Homepage