Sunday, 16 February 2014

Response to: 'Muhammad and the Death of Kinana ibn al-Rabi'

This is really pathetic. A couple of Christian missionaries have just gone on camera and half-heartedly claimed Prophet Muhammad tortured somebody for treasure. The interesting thing here is that one of these Christian missionaries KNOWS that the reference that he used to try and convince naïve folk that Prophet Muhammad tortured a man called Knana is not valid - it has no narrator and no source for it. MUSLIMS throughout the centuries have not accepted this story so HONEST Christians should not use it for any argumentation. Here is the text which Muslim scholarship does no accept (as it has no evidence to it):

 "Kinana al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it.  He denied that he knew where it was.  A Jew came (Tabari says "was brought"), to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early.  When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?"  He said "Yes".  The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found.  When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has."  So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead.  Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud."  

Here is a Bassam Zawadi's response to the claim and the use of this text:

Many anti Islamics have used this incident of the torture of Kinana to attack the integrity of the Prophet. When I first read about it, I myself was quite shocked that the Prophet would torture some one just because of some treasure. 
Indeed Islam teaches us that treatment of the prisoners of war is a must. For the evidence you can read...

Now back to the Kinana issue. Actually the source of this story is invalid. Not because the source is weak, but because there is no source!

Having left Medina and settled at Khaibar, the Banu Nadir started hatching a wide-spread conspiracy against Islam. Their leaders, Sallam Ibn Abi-al Huqauaiq, Huyayy Ibn Akhtab, Kinana al-Rabi and others came to Mecca, met the Quraish and told them that Islam could be destroyed." (Allama Shibli Nu'Mani, Sirat-Un-Nabi, volume II, p 106)
This goes to show that Kinana was a war criminal. Let's read on...

" While describing the battle of Khaibar, the history writers have committed a serious blunder in reporting a totally baseless report, which has become a common place. It is said that the Prophet ( Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had granted amnesty to the Jews on condition that they would not hide anything. When Kinana Ibn Rabi' refused to give any clue to the hidden treasures, the Prophet ( peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) ordered Zubair to adopt stern measures to force a disclosure. Zubair branded his chest with a hot flint again and again, till he was on the point of death. At last he ordered Kinana to be put to death and all the Jews were made slaves.
The whole truth in the story is that Kinana was put to death. But it was not for his refusal to give a clue to the hidden treasure. He was put to death because he had killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (also Muslima). Tabari had reported it in unambiguous words: " Then the Holy Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) gave Kinana to Muhammad Ibn Maslama (Muslima), " and he put him to death in retaliation of the murder of his own brother, Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima)."
In the rest of the report, both Tabari and Ibn Hisham have quoted it from Ibn Ishaq, but Ibn Ishaq does not name any narrator. Traditionalists, in books on Rijal, have explicitly stated that Ibn Ishaq used to borrow from the Jews stories concerning the battle of the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). As Ibn Ishaq does not mention the name of any narrator whatsoever in this case, there is every likelihood of the story of having been passed on by the Jews.
That a man should be tortured with burns on his chest by the sparks of a flint is too heinous a deed for a Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) who had earned for himself the title of Rahma'lil Alamin (Mercy for all the worlds). After all, did he not let the woman who had sought to poison him go scot free? Who would expect such a soul to order human body to be so burnt for the sake of a few coins.
As a matter of fact, Kinana Ibn Rabi Ibn al-Huquaiq had been granted his life on the condition that he would never break faith or make false statements. He had also given his word, according to one of the reports, that if he did anything to the contrary, he could be put to death. Kinana played false, and the immunity granted to him was withdrawn. He killed Mahmud Ibn Maslama (Muslima) and had, therefore to suffer for it, as we have already stated on the authority of Tabari." (Allama Shibli Nu'Mani, Sirat-Un-Nabi, volume II, p 173-174)
As we can see there is no evidence what so ever for this story of Kinana because there is no narration or source given. It was contrary to the teachings of the Quran and the Prophet's character. Therefore, Christians have to stop using this argument against the glorious Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Invitation to Islam
Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (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 of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:


Radical Moderate said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Yahya Snow said...


Please stop trying to argue a dead horse.

The 'historian's you speak of at the time merely gathered what they heard or came across WITHOUT checking its authenticity. The checks of authenticity were left to others. The 'historian' was not stupid and would recognise in order to believe something you need authenticity - this is where the scholars of ahadith come into play (they check the authenticity).

That's the way our sources work, it's unlike the Christian Gospel accounts where Christians have accepted stuff from anonymous authors as well as unknown scribes. For us, religion is important hence why we have authenticity checks - the basics of this would be to have a CHAIN OF NARRATION which includes the SOURCE. With regards to the torturing for treasure claim - there's no SOURCE and NO NARRATOR - thus the person who values scholarship, integrity and from whom he takes his religion will not accept it.

Here is how scholars see Tabari's reporting:

In these volumes, he [Tabari] reported the various narrations as they were transmitted and by whom. His discussion is a mixed bag of valuable and worthless, sound and unsound information. This is in keeping with the custom of many Hadith scholars who merely report the information they have on a subject and make no distinction between what is sound and what is weak.

Here is some more information for you to see that even they did not claim the material was authentic:

Imam at-Tabari’s book was simply an attempt to place Hadiths into a chronological order so that they would read out like a historical narrative; therefore, Tabari–like Ibn Ishaq–did a wonderful job of creating one of the first books which placed Hadiths in a chronological order. However, Imam at-Tabari only placed them in the right order, but he did not authenticate them, nor did he claim that


PLEASE do some research rather than allowing your bias against Islam dictate and make you look unscholarly and untrustworthy.

Authenticity and reliability are important - hence why Muslims don't accept the claim of torture.


I shall delete your comment.


Radical Moderate said...

And again you deleted a comment of mine that was DIRECTLY on TOPIC

Radical Moderate said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.