In the name of Allah (God),
I have decided to dedicate sincere and honest endeavour in helping to establish the Truth by helping to defend the good name of the last Prophet (pbuh) of Allah as well as refuting many other lies and misconceptions that are being disseminated by the insincere, wicked, deceptive, intellectually and morally bankrupted individuals as well as the ignorant individuals who all share a faulty characteristic; a blatant disregard for the Truth.
I ask Allah to purify my intentions and save me from doing any good action for self-aggrandizement, as all actions are judged by intentions. May Allah Love me, and bless this work. My message to any non-Muslim reading this is thus:
Please give Islam a chance, research it for yourself and allow Muslims and Muslim sources to be your primary resources you refer to when studying Islam rather than basing your views on agenda-motivated Islamophobic sources.
O Allah, You are Al-Wadud (The Loving)...please O Allah love me and bless all those Muslims and non-Muslims who read this.
Ameen
I do wonder whether any Muslim has, in person, invited Kanye West and/or Kim Kardashian to Islam. I'd like them to convert to Islam (if they are not Muslims already). If they are not Muslims, I invite them and any Non-Muslim fans of theirs to become Muslims. The same applies to Bruce Jenner.
Islam is a simple religion that teaches us to worship God alone and to believe in all the Prophets of God including Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon all the Prophets). Interestingly enough for Catholics and Protestants, Islam is the religion that Jesus (p) will follow upon his second coming.
Invitation to Islam
Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother/sister of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.
This excerpt from Dr Jonathan Brown is insightful and important for many on the internet as there are misconceptions and Islamophobic allegations swirling around the internet.
Some of the take home points:
Muslim scholars historically have forbade sex with girls who are not of physical capability to undergo it on the basis that sex could be physically harmful. Thus really, if we transfer this historical scholarship and thought, then stories of young girls dying or being harmed through sex because they weren't physically ready for it would be in contradiction with Muslim scholarly views.
If somebody did have sex with a girl who was pre-pubescent, the Shariah courts considered it despicable and censured it. It was socially condemned too thus showing that Muslim communities considered this act to be despicable.
The legacy of Prophet Muhammad's (p) marriage to Aisha (ra) is the Muslim teaching that sexual relations cannot be had with anybody not physically mature enough.
Islam, contrary to what some Islamophobic bigots may say, does not allow sex if it is physically harmful for the girl. And of course, that is an outright opposition to paedophilia (sex with prepubescent girls).
...the medieval ulama considered the point at which a girl was fit for intercourse to be too varied to be firmly legislated for. It was most appropriate for the bride, groom and the bride's guardian to determine the appropriate age for intercourse. The norm that the ulama did come to consensus on was only a general guideline: they prohibited sexual intercourse for girls 'not able to undergo it,' on the basis that otherwise sex could be physically harmful. If the groom and his wife or her guardian disagreed about her capacity for sex, a Shariah court judge would decide, perhaps after a female expert witness examined her. This was also based on the Prophet's marriage to Aisha. The couple had concluded the marriage contract when Aisha was only six but waited to consummate the marriage until she reached physical maturity. In the case of the Hanbali tradition followed by the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, sex was allowed when the bride was 'at the age which others like her have intercourse,' specifying nine as the norm for suitability on the basis of Aisha's Hadith. A Scottish physician resident in Aleppo in the mid 1700s noted how families endeavoured to marry their children off (i.e. complete the marriage contract) at a young age but that they would not consummate the marriage until the girl 'had come of age''. Historical evidence from nineteenth-century Ottoman Palestine suggests that the husbands having sexual intercourse with wives before they reached puberty did sometimes occur. But it was rare, condemned socially and censured by Shariah court judges. Shariah courts in French Algeria in the 1850s considered it equally despicable.
'Misquoting Muhammad', Jonathan A.C Brown, Kindle p143
Here's an important video featuring Shaikh Muhammad Salah, Dr Jonathan Brown, Hamza Yusuf, Dr Bilal Philips, Shaikh Imran Hossein and Dr Yasir Qadhi which all go towards destroying the Islamophobic claim against the idea of Aisha having reached puberty.
He may well be the oldest British convert to Islam. Allah knows best. Use this as an inspiration to give dawah to older people in the UK too.
Meet Br Mohamed Keith-Kinglsey Cunliffe of London, the oldest convert that I have ever had the pleasure of meeting. He will be turning 90 soon, and he converted to Islam a few years ago.
I asked him to tell me his fascinating story. He was accepted to Sandhurst Academy, the Royal Military Academy of England, but because WW2 was in full swing, he was told that he would have to be conscripted in the army and that he would automatically be promoted in the military in lieu of his studies at Sandhurst. But he told me, "I couldn't go fight in the war because I didn't want to kill another human being." So he turned down the prestigious offer.
After the war, in the early 1950s, he got a job with a British company to manage a tea factory in Indonesia. It was there, he said, that he saw Muslims for the first time in his life. Although he only worked there for a few years, the memories of those Muslims always remained with him, and when he returned, he purchased a copy of the Quran and continue to read it, and other works about Islam, for the next sixty years!!
He said he always wanted to convert but the opportunity never presented itself. One day, as he was walking in the street of London, he passed by a dawah stall run by my friend Abd al-Raheem Green and others. One conversation led to a few meetings, and finally, in his 80s, Keith adopted the name 'Muhammad', after the man whom he admired most.
One of the locals told me that he is so eager to learn the Quran that he attends the Quran classes his local masjid offers to the little kids to read the Arabic. So our brother Mohammad, at the age of 90, sits with 5 year olds to learn how to recite the Quran! He confessed to me, slightly apologetic, "I can read now, but I still don't understand the Arabic!"
I asked him, "What was it about those Indonesian workers that impressed you so much and caused you to take such an interest in Islam?" He immediately responded, "Their good manners. And their prayers - I would watch them walk into the river and wash themselves, and asked them what they were doing. So they told me they were performing wudhu for their prayer."
Let us take a lesson from this anecdote: never, ever underestimate the power of good manners, and of true spirituality. Those Indonesian workers probably never knew the impact of their simple akhlaq on their 'boss', yet six decades later, it was their cheery attitude, their honesty, and their salat that caused Keith to accept the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and change his name to the man that he loved the most. Taken from Dr Yasir Qadhi's FB
Commanding General Yahanna is challenged to debate myself or any other Muslim if he believes and teaches the Biblical texts in this video are proof Jesus (p) is black.
Commanding General Yahanna and other ISUPK as well as all other Hebrew Israelite groups are misleading people.
Don't be fooled by ISUPK. Hebrew Israelites in the UK (Birmingham, London and beyond) are asked to contemplate upon this video and look into Islam with an open heart. Islam has all the solutions for all the problems of black people in America and Britain.
Muslim Preaches to all Hebrew Israelites - Was Jesus Black According to Bible
The Prophet considered racism as “ignorance”When his Arab Companion Abu Dharr called Bilal 'son of the black woman', the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) got angry and told him: 'You are a man who has ignorance in him.' Abu Dharr felt such a great remorse that he put his cheek on the ground and asked Bilal to tread on his other cheek if he’d like to.
ICGJC, ISUPK, GMS, IUIC, GOCC captain tazaryach, black Hebrew Israelites London, Birmingham, new York, polight, COMMANDING GENERAL YAHANNA, radio, the grill, ahrayah, tazadaqyahRachaayaqam, Pahshaahla, and Ramah
Sheikh Yasir Qadhi teaches us that the practice of stoning the Devil during the Hajj pilgrimage is Abrahamic. Whilst Abraham was attempting to fulfil God's order of sacrificing Ishmael Satan appeared and tried to prevent Abraham from obeying the command of God - Abraham pelted Satan with 7 stones.
Thus the act of pelting the Devil during the Hajj is Abrahamic. It's not a pagan act.
A great victory for Muslims in the West. I hope and pray there are more and more victories for us Muslims in the near future.
The US Supreme Court has ruled in favour of a Muslim woman who was denied a job because of her headscarf. Abercrombie & Fitch Co refused to hire Samantha Elauf because her dress violated the clothing retailer's "Look Policy" for sales staff. BBC
Two young men who reportedly stopped an Isis suicide bomber entering a mosque in Saudi Arabia are being hailed as heroes after being killed when he blew himself up.
The friends, named as Mohammed Hassan Ali bin Isa and Abdul-Jalil al-Arbash, died after reportedly turning the attacker away from the Imam Hussein mosque in Dammam today.
The Banu Qurayza’s demise is one which critics of Islam manipulate to work their Islamophobic agendas (and in many cases Christian evangelical agendas!). This article is for those who actually want to cut through the Islamophobia whilst understanding the main issues relating to Banu Qurayzah (Quraiza). For those who simply follow ill-informed Christian evangelists/bigots without the merest hint of research or credentials then this piece is not for you.
Firstly, the number of Jews killed in the incident is uncertain. The figures generally banded around number 600-900. Karen Armstrong uses the figure of 700 [1].
Who was the Banu Qurayza?
The Banu Qurayza (Arabic: بني قريظة; بنو قريظة alternate spellings include Quraiza, Qurayzah, Quraytha, and the archaic Koreiza) were a Jewish tribe which lived in northern Arabia, at the oasis of Yathrib (presently known as Medina), until the 7th century, when their conflict with Muhammad led to their demise, after the Invasion of Banu Qurayza, took place in the Dhul Qa‘dah, 5 A.H i.e. in February/March, 627 AD [2]
An Encyclopaedic view on Banu Qurayzah
The most concise depiction of the issues relating to the Jews of Banu Qurayzah that I have come across is from the learned Cyril Glasse’s Encyclopaedia of Islam. Points made by Cyril Glasse shall be presented with interjections of an explanatory nature.
Qurayzah. A Jewish tribe of Medina that betrayed the Muslims during the battle of the Trench. When the Quraysh abandoned the siege of the city, Gabriel commanded the Prophet not to lay down arms until the Qurayzah were subdued. Their hands freed by the departure of the Quraysh and their confederates, the Muslims turned upon the Banu Qurayzah and besieged their defensive towers for twenty five days. [3]
[The Quraysh were the pagan tribe from Mecca who attempted to exterminate the nascent Muslim community (and Prophet Muhammad, p) in the battle of the Trench. They marched up to Medina with the sole intent of annihilating the Muslims. The Qurayzah betrayed the Muslims and allied with the Quraish, thus further jeopardising the existence of the Muslim community]
Who decided the men of Banu Qurayza should be killed and why?
When the Banu Qurayzah surrendered they were judged, as a concession, by Sa’d ibn Muadh, a chief of their former allies, the Aws; lying on his deathbed, in pain from a wound inflicted during the fighting with the Quraysh, he passed a rigorous judgement: the adult men should be put to death and the women and children sold into slavery. [3]
[Later on in this segment, Glasse lets us know this ruling is within the BIBLE (Deut 20:12) and most likely Sa’d ibn Muadh was using their law to judge them.
12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies. {Deuteronomy 20:12-14New International Version (NIV)}
The Christian bigots and other critics do not relay the information that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) had NOTHING to do with the judgement which befell the Banu Qurayzah and moreover, the BIBLE, most likely, had more to do with the punishment of this tribe of Jews (Banu Qurayzah).than any other text or teaching]
Cyril Glasse: criticism concerning the Banu Qurayzah is unfair
In books written in the West, the episode has been the occasion for criticism as an example of extreme cruelty. But it was not as unusual event; similar punishment was meted out elsewhere, as is the destruction of the Albigensians in France, for example and for much the same reason. It is the case of the final judgement overtaking people while still in this world. [3]
The Bible teaches such punishments
The irony is quite immense. Some of the Christian bigots and evangelists using this event to shock folk into leaving Islam wind up with egg on their face as the punishment meted out to the Banu Qurayzah seems very much biblical. The extent of ignorance amongst Christian Islamophobes and evangelists regarding the bible never ceases to amaze us – only the ignorant Christians use the incident of the Banu Qurayzah as criticism and/or evangelical pieces.
In the Bible there are numerous comparable cases. Jewish law itself prescribes such treatment for the conquest of a city as a matter of course, even when betrayal is not in question:
[Glasse cites Deuteronomy 20:12, here is the NIV translation of Deuteronomy 20:12-14:
12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies.]
This is perhaps why Sa’d ibn Muadh gave the Qurayzah this sentence; that their own law should be used on them [3]
Exiling Banu Qurayzah Vs. Biblical Judgement (killing) of Banu Qurayzah
Though it may sound quite callous, it must be stated that the wisdom of using the biblical judgement (killing) outweighed the simple exiling of the Banu Qurayzah in the way of the Banu Nadir and Banu Qaynuqa as an exile would have meant a swelling of enemy ranks within Khaybar and advancing a potential threat to the existence of the nascent Muslims society. [3]
Karen Armstrong writes:
The massacre of Qurayzah was a horrible incident, but it would be a mistake to judge it by the standards of our own time. This was a very primitive society: the Muslims themselves had just narrowly escaped extermination, and had Muhammad simply exiled Qurayzah they would have swelled the Jewish opposition in Khaybar and brought another war upon the ummah. In seventh-century Arabia an Arab chief was not expected to show mercy traitors like Qurayzah. The executions sent a grim message to Khaybar and helped to quell the pagan opposition in Medina, since the pagan leaders had been the allies of the rebellious Jews. This was a fight to the death, and everybody had always known the stakes were high. [1]
Hating Jews?
Sadly, critics and some of the unlearned Christian bigots and evangelists use this event to promote the idea of Muslims being inherently anti-Jew. Karen Armstrong corrects such misconstructions:
The struggle did not indicate any hostility towards Jews in general, but only towards the three rebel tribes…
…Smaller Jewish groups continued to live in Medina, and later Jews, like Christians, enjoyed full religious liberty in the Islamic empires. Anti-Semitism is a Christian vice. Hatred of the Jews became marked in the Muslim world only after the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and the subsequent loss of Arab Palestine. [1]
[1] Islam - A Short History, Karen Armstrong, Phoenix Press, 2001, p18
[2] Wikipedia on Banu Qurayza
[3] The Concise Encyclopaedia of Islam, Revised Edition, Cyril Glasse, Stacey International, 2001 p374
The unsavoury mix of bigoted Christian fundamentalists/missionaries and other internet critics of Islam make much out of the episode concerning Ka’b Ibn Al Ashraf’s (alternatively spelled as Kab/Kaab Bin Al-Ashraf) assassination by the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (p), this post offers the ENTIRE story rather than the hybrid of half-baked ‘information’ and nutty Islamophobic propaganda put forward by Christians and other critics of Islam.
If you are one of these folks who gains his/her information concerning Islam from unqualified Christian fundamentalists and/or other critics this may be a little too informative for your liking. However, if you are somebody who genuinely wants to gain a sincere understanding on the assassination of Ka’b Ibn Al Ashraf then this post is geared towards your needs.
The post comprises of excerpts from the world renowned Sheikh Al Mubarakpuri, the American scholar Sheikh Mustafa Zayed’s comments on the subject and a detailed audio lecture by Dr Bashar Shala as well as additional comments in the way of summary and perspective.
Who was Ka’ Ibn Ashraf?
Ka’ bin Ashraf was the most resentful person among the Jews with Islam and the Muslims, he was the most intent on inflicting harm on Allah’s Messenger (p), and the most zealous advocate of waging war against him. He belonged to the Tai’ but his mother was from Banu Nadeer. He was a wealthy man known for his handsomeness, and a poet living in luxury in his fort south east of Madinah at the rear of Banu Nadeer’s habitations. [1]
Dr Bashar Shala on the Killing of Ka’b ibn al-Ashraf
What did Ka’b ibn al Ashraf do to deserve being killing?
Dr Shala teaches us of the open hatred and animosity Ka’b bin al Ashraf had against Muslims despite having signed a non-aggression treaty with the Muslims. Poets, back then in Arabia, were propaganda tools. After the Muslim victory at the battle of Badr, Ka’b ibn al Ashraf began to insult Prophet Muhammad and Islam as well as inciting violence against Muslims in order to instigate a war with the intent to wipe out the nascent Muslim community. The last stage of Ka’b’s propaganda campaign was to insult the honor of Muslim women.
Sheikh Al Mubarpakpuri writes on Ka’b Al Ashraf’s incitement to war and his general propaganda campaign:
On hearing the news of Badr, he [Ka’b] got terribly frustrated and swore that he would prefer death to life if the news was true. When this was confirmed he wrote poems satirizing Muhammad (p), praising the Quraish and enticing them against the Prophet (p). He then rode to Makkah where he started to activate the fire of war, and kindle the resentment against the Muslims in Madinah…[2]
…He then returned to Madinah to start a fresh campaign of slanderous propaganda that took the form of obscene songs and amorous poems with a view to defaming the Muslim women. At this stage, the situation became unbearable and could no longer be put up with. [3]
Ka’b bin al Ashraf broke the treaty
Dr Bashar Shala mentions the treaty which Ka’b broke included stipulations such as:
1. Jews should be one nation with Muslims
2. Muslims and Jews should advise and protect each other
3. They should have goodness in their treatment of each other.
4. If Muslims are being fought by an enemy then the Jews should side with the Muslims
Yet Ka’b Ibn Al Ashraf BROKE the treaty to such an extent that he sided with the enemies of the Muslims and proceeded to incite a war against the Muslims in order to completely annihilate Muslims!
Dr Shala asks, did Kaab ibn al Ashraf deserve to be killed? The answer he gives is yes. Simply based on the treaty and the fact that Ka’b was inciting war against the Muslims as well as insulting the honor of their women folk.
War and Deceit? Tricking Ka’b and Christian bigots
Dr Bashar Shala does explain the reason behind the necessity to trick Kab ~ 10-11 min stretch.
Some American Christian bigots on the internet make a melodramatic play on the account that the Muslims tricked Ka’b in order to gain the opportunity to kill him. These bigots typically miss that this was within the theatre of war and Ka’b lived in a fort which was heavily defended by guards/servants, hence the tactic of tricking Ka’b into a false sense of security to get him out in the open. During times of declared war, misleading the enemy is accepted by ALL nations including Christian America. The critics’ inconsistency is outlined by Moustafa Zayed:
All martial arts and war tactics are about deceptive techniques to maximize chances for massive blows to the enemy and achieving victory. But when it comes to Muslims it’s crying about moral absolutes vs. expediency. [4]
Why not fight Ka’b rather than assassinate him?
Why not then fight Ibn Al Ashraf in a battle man to man and face to face like the Muslims and the Quraysh did? The reason is that a leader of the hypocrites like Ibn Al Ashraf never attended the battles, yet he publicly plotted and pushed for conspiracies to annihilate the Muslims, only from the safety behind closed doors. [5]
Islamophobic Propaganda: Killed a POET in a curb against freedom of speech!!!
From the information within Dr Bashar Shala’s lecture we learn the manner in which critics portray the incident is misleading to say the least. Robert Spencer is scolded by Sheikh Mustafa Zayed for such misreporting:
Another piece of misinformation is that [Ka’b] Ibn Al Ashraf was only just a poet! Is the author [Robert Spencer] saying that to make it a freedom-of-speech crime? Maybe he is! [6]
…What the author didn’t tell you about our peaceful, just voicing-his-opinion poet, is that he was one of the provokers of the infidels in Mecca that directed the torture, the starvation and the killing of early Muslims, and specifically was one of the leading instigators to push Quraysh and its leaders to go and destroy the Muslims in the battle of Uhud. [7]
…Our lovely poet was one of the conspirators. In Islamic law and any fair law for that matter, if someone gave himself the right to take your life, then he had given you the right to take his same instant in self-defense…not to mention that Ibn Al Ashraf had committed suicide by putting a “wanted” sign over his head when he violated the honorable reputation of the Muslim wives. [8]
A bonus: miracle of healing
Typically the critics miss the healing miracle of the Muslim who was wounded during the assassination of Ka’b bin Al Ashraf:
The group of men came back after fulfilling their mission. One of them Al-Harith bin Aws was wounded by mistake with the swords of his men, and was bleeding badly. When they reached Baqi’ Al-Gharqad, they shouted “Allah is Most Great”. The Prophet (p) heard them and realized that they had killed the enemy of Allah. As they saw him, he said: “Cheerful faces are yours.” In reply, they said: “And yours, O Messenger of Allah.” They handed the head of the tyrant over to him. He entertained Allah’s praise for their success. He then applied his saliva to Al-Harith’s wound and it healed on the spot. [9]
The Bible and Christian Hypocrisy
Many of these critics are Christian missionaries and/or Christian bigots who feign offense at such an incident. Sadder still, these Christians do this despite knowing of the violent teachings within the Old Testament which would propel these Christians into the realms of inconsistency (hypocrisy). I’m sure Christians and Muslims can think of their own Bible verse (s) (involving killing) which would illustrate the point of inconsistency, here is one which does it quite adequately despite not even involving death:
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity. [Deuteronomy 25:11-12 NIV]
If our Christian friends can accept the amputating of a woman who helps her husband in a fight with another man by attacking her husband’s assailant via a ‘low blow’ then they can certainly accept the killing of a poet who broke a peace treaty whilst attempting to incite the enemy to destroy Muslims!
Conclusion
The killing of Kab bin al Ashraf was not simply the killing of a “poet”. Sadly, we are being misinformed by Christian “experts” with dubious agendas of conversion and propaganda.
For a further discussion on the assassination of Ka'b ibn al Ashraf by Dr Yasir Qadhi please see:
A girl was slandered and this led to her losing her life. Police and journalists said the rumoured video was not even of her.
Respect to Brother Ali Dawah for reaching out to young Muslims and teaching them the gravity of slander. FaceBook and the like can be very dangerous tools. Be careful and think before acting.
Michelle writes:When you have been on the receiving end of Muslim hate merchantswhohave abused you which I have been and your sons then you would understand why I want this religion of HATE towards me and other non Muslims banned and destroyed to stop this sick enslavement of yazidi and Christian women, the burning of our churches and the Demand everything you want over everyone else who is non muslim then you would feel the same way as I do
My message to Michelle: Wait, whatever happened to forgiveness? Muslims did something bad to you so you blame the religion and hate all Muslims? So by that logic all African Americans should hate white Christians...after all it was the white Christians who kidnapped, raped and tortured their people while getting rich off their hard work...
Do you see how flawed your argument is?
PLEASE talk to your local imam. Really, have positive dialogues with Muslims. Stop the hatred of Muslims. Try to understand and befriend.
Peace.
