I have just come across a Hadith from Sahih Al-Bukhari which confirms the number of soldiers with the Prophet Muhammad (p) upon the Conquest of Mecca were indeed TEN THOUSAND (10,000):
Narrated Ibn Abbas : The Prophet left Medina (for Mecca) in the company of ten-thousand (Muslim warriors) in (the month of) Ramadan, and that was eight and a half years after his migration to Medina. He and the Muslims who were with him, proceeded on their way to Mecca. He was fasting and they were fasting, but when they reached a place called Al-Kadid which was a place of water between 'Usfan and Kudaid, he broke his fast and so did they. (Az-Zuhri said, "One should take the last action of Allah's Apostle and leave his early action (while taking a verdict.")
http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=59&number=574&start=0&translator=1
Original article (prior to the update above)
Recently I was reviewing a debate between a Muslim (Osama Abdallah) and a Christian (Anthony Rogers) on whether Muhammad is prophesized in the modern day Bible. Upon the discussion of the of whether Deut 33:2 referred to Prophet Muhammad (p) and his army of ten thousand who liberated Mecca (8AH) the Christian said something which went against what is stated by Muslim scholars and biography writers of Prophet Muhammad (p).
The Christian claimed Prophet Muhammad (p) had 12,000 soldiers with him not 10,000. I was baffled. In fact I reckon his Muslim opponent was baffled too.
What’s the correct number? 10,000 or 12,000?
The correct number is 10,000. This is confirmed by the world renowned biography writer, Safi-ur-Rahman Al Mubarakpuri in his seerah book, The Sealed Nectar:
After making full preparation, the Prophet (p) proceeded to Makkah at the head of TEN THOUSAND soldiers on the 10th of Ramadan, 8 A.H. [p461,Ar-Raheequl-Makhtum by Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, Darussalam, 2002]
Where did the Christian debater get the number 12,000 from?
He got it from a Christian missionary article by Sam Shamoun, who seems to be desperate to try and convince Christians that those Biblical references are not about Prophet Muhammad (p). Seemingly so desperate that he was willing to mislead his co-religionists. Here is the relevant part where the Christian debater (Anthony Rogers) got his misinformation from:
The final problem with Osama's claim is that according to
Muslim sources, Muhammad did not enter Mecca
"Ibn Humayd- Salamah- Ibn
Ishaq- 'Abdallah b. Abi Bakr: The Messenger marched with 2,000 Meccans and
10,000 of his companions [who had marched with him and] with whose help God had
facilitated the conquest of Mecca
Thus, Osama's key, foundational point connecting Muhammad
with Deuteronomy 33:2 is not only utterly basely from a biblical perspective,
but his claim of ten thousand Muslim soldiers doesn't even have the support of
his own Muslim sources!
It's really interesting to note he only partially quoted from this reference from Al-Tabari, why? It's also interesting to note that the text he does quote even indicates it's not referring to the conquest of Mecca as it differentiates between the 10,000 companions and the 2,000 Meccans.
Time to correct this Christian missionary so he stops misleading people.
The citation from Al-Tabari refers to the battle AFTER the conquest of Mecca. 10,000 were present for the conquest of
Nineteen days after Allah’s Messenger entered Makkah, he left accompanied by twelve thousand Muslims. Ten thousand of those who had previously shared in the Makkah conquest. A great number of the other two thousand . who were Makkans, had recently embraced Islam. [p477,Ar-Raheequl-Makhtum by Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, Darussalam, 2002]
Conclusion
It seems the Christian missionary website is either deliberately misleading their readers or is so amateurish that its writer lacks reading comprehension, the ability to research and sense.
Our advice to Christians is, please do not rely on shoddy Christian missionary websites – they are not reliable and will make you look foolish.
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk
Convert to Islam today:
http://thedeenshow.com/
22 comments:
Here are the verses in question
The liberation of Mecca (Paran) by 10,000 Muslims in the Bible:
Let us look at the following Verse from the King James Version Bible: "And Enoch [Idris in Arabic, one of Allah Almighty's Prophets peace be upon all of them to the people of Israel.] also, the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 1:14-15)"
Let us also look at the following Verse: "And he said, The LORD came from Si'-nai, and rose up from Se'-ir unto them; he shined forth from mount Pa'-ran [Mecca in Arabic], and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. (The King James Version Bible, Deuteronomy 33:2)" According to Islam's history, when Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and his followers faced hostility from the people of Mecca (Paran), they had to leave the city. They fled to the City of "Yathrib" which was called later "Madina" where Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him continued to spread Islam to all of the Arabs and then later to the countries near by.
Yahya - Are you saying that Muhammad is YHWH?
@Anon
My article is about 10,000 or 12,000. Correcting the misinformation fed to a Chrstian debater (Anthony Rogers) by the missionary named Sam Shamoun.
For the record, I believe Muhammad (p) is a Prophet of God so he is not God.
I hope that clears things up.
My blog post was not arguing for a position on Deut 33:2.
However, I am trying to put together a review or two of Muslim-Christian debates on whether Prophet Muhammad is in the Bible.
I do hope one will be uploaded this week.
Even his own collegues aren't free from Sam shamouns sham articles. Anthony rogers shud ask for his money back.
"And Enoch [Idris in Arabic, one of Allah Almighty's Prophets peace be upon all of them to the people of Israel.] around the time of enoch, israel had not even been born...
Time to pwn this deceptive, slanderous idolater once again. Here is the quote in full:
Ibn Humayd- Salamah- Ibn Ishaq- 'Abdallah b. Abi Bakr: The Messenger MARCHED with 2,000 Meccans and 10,000 of his companions [who had marched with him and] WITH WHOSE HELP GOD HAD FACILITATED THE CONQUEST OF MECCA. THUS THERE WERE 12,000 IN ALL. The Messenger of God placed 'Attab b. Asid b. Abi al-'As b. Umayyah b. 'Abd Shams in charge of Mecca [to look after] the men who stayed behind while he proceeded to confront Hawazin." (The History of Al-Tabari: The Last Years of the Prophet, translated and annotated by Ismail K. Poonawala [State University of New York Press, Albany 1990], Volume IX, p. 8; bold emphasis ours)
This deceiver has assumed that the context is saying that the 12,000 refers to the number that went out with Muhammad to confront Hawazin. However, nothing in the context limits this to Hawazin. Rather, the plain reading of the text is that this is referring to the fact that the same number which helped Muhammad conquer Mecca was the same number who once again marched out with him to attack another place. Now how does this Muhammad refute my claim By quoting Mubarakpuri, instead of proving his position from the text of al-Tabari! The reason is obvious. The plain wording of al-Tabari is that there were actually 12,000 men who helped Muhammad conquer Mecca and who also joined him in another expedition. The stone worshiper assumes the uniformity of his sources, so that if al-Tabari and others elsewhere mention 10,000 then this somehow means that they could not refer to a different number in other contexts. Because of this, this pagan leaves me no choice but to educate him on his sources. work. More to come in the next posts.
Sam,
Stop your desperation.
The quote in Al Tabari is telling you it's not about the conquest of Mecca - hence why you deliberately omitted the part where it mentions the Hawazin,
Why did you omit it from your original post on your website?
I think I know...because it would have destroyed your attempt to convince people about the number of 10,000
I AM MORE convinced that you deliberately tried to mislead people.
Even the quote from Al-Tabari differentiates between the companions (10,000) and the Meccans? Why? Because these were the Meccans who joined the TEN THOUSAND after they had been liberated by the 10,000
Al Mubarakpuri is an expert.
You're an idiot. A deceptive one at that.
PS your off-topic posts were deleted because it seemed as thouh you were trying to change the subject.
I bid you good day
LOL Sam, so you couldn't prove it from Al-Tabari so you went GOOGLING and have presented to me some links to shia material?
Are they Al-Tabari? No.
Stick to the topic you deceiver.
Why did you omit the part where it tells you it was concerning confronting Hawazin? Why? DECPTION!!!
Al Mubarakpuri is an authority the world over. Please no more shia links/ They are not Al Tabari nor experts in the field such as Al Mubarakpuri
Just admit your mistake...
Sam
Stay on topic.
We are talking about your citation of Al Tabari.
Just tell me and everybody else WHY you omitted the part where it tells you it was concerning confronting Hawazin.
Why?
Simple question?
Yet first you start spamming with some hadith about nothing to do with the subject like I'm here to answer on every and any topic you decide to throw at me.
Then you start spamming with shia stuff
Then you start spamming with anything you can get hold of.
Stick to the topic. AL TABARI!!!!
WHY omit the part telling you whether it was about the conquest of Mecca or not? Uh?
It's obvious why :)
Peace
Sam, Sam
I've enjoyed tonight.
You have just shown yourself to be a complete deceiver.
You practically proved you DELIBERATELY misled your colleague and others about Al Tabarai.
Still going to spam irrelevant stuff or are you going to talk about Al Tbari? You fed Anthony a pack of lies and sent him into a debate to make him look a fool!
Sam, true scholarship is required:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjL_epSmfTI
YS
PS It was interesting jostling with you. Don't be upset that I came out on top. It's fastng month now. Please Sam try to fast and join a Muslim community and be sincere.
At the end of the day Sam, this is not about me and you or Dr Shabir v Dr White
I invite you to worship the God that Jesus would want you to worship. The one he did worship.
Think about it Sam
UPDATE: There is actually a narration in Sahih al Bukhari which confirms the number is 10,000:
Narrated Ibn Abbas : The Prophet left Medina (for Mecca) in the company of ten-thousand (Muslim warriors) in (the month of) Ramadan, and that was eight and a half years after his migration to Medina. He and the Muslims who were with him, proceeded on their way to Mecca. He was fasting and they were fasting, but when they reached a place called Al-Kadid which was a place of water between 'Usfan and Kudaid, he broke his fast and so did they. (Az-Zuhri said, "One should take the last action of Allah's Apostle and leave his early action (while taking a verdict.")
Sam, the game is up.
You have not been able to answer why you mis-cited Al-Tabari (you misread it and you partially quoted it to fudge the fact that it was not about the conquest of Mecca).
Apologise!
YS
Sam, this whole saga is summarized in the link below. Thanks for kind of admitting you deceived people with your partial citation of Al-Tabari. That's a start.
See here:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/answeringislamorg-tacit-admission-of.html
PS stay on topic. The stuff off topic was deleted.
The topic is, did you deliberately hide the part of the Al-Tabari reference which proves the 12,000 was not related to the Mecca conquest but to a battle AFTER the Mecca Conquest? Yes.
Post a Comment