|
|
| Line 184: |
Line 184: |
|
| |
|
| ===Responses to apologetics=== | | ===Responses to apologetics=== |
| {{Quote||Zaid went on a trading journey to Syria and with some merchandise. The Banu Fazara tribe, whose leader was Umm Qirfa, attacked him and his companions and snatched all their merchandise. They killed some Muslims. So Umm Qirfa and her tribe deserved their fate.}}
| |
|
| |
| Some apologists make this claim by citing the books of Ibn Sa'd and Ibn Hisham. On the other hand, Ibn Ishaq says that the first event in the chronology was Zaid's raid on a place called Wadi-al-Qurra and then came a skirmish with Banu Fazara. Mubarakpuri (a 20th century author) claims that Zaid was on a reconnaissance mission. Moreover, the Sahih sources do not even hint at any trading journey by Zaid. So, seemingly, the historians have contradicted each other.
| |
|
| |
| Let's give some benefit of doubt to these narrations and focus only on the fate of the people involved. As the story goes, Zaid is hurt and some Muslims are killed by a pagan tribe. So he comes back with a vengeance, kills 30 horsemen, kills Umm Qirfa brutally and captures her beautiful daughter who is eventually given away as ransom. This is a typical case of small-scale battles, skirmishes and taking of POWs, all of which have been happening in the world since time immemorial—since the dawn of humanity. What did Muhammad do about it that was exemplary or extraordinary? Muslims consider him a messenger of God, the best of all mankind, the best of creation and an example to follow (imitate). But here, the minimum conclusion we can make is that a much-glorified Muhammad didn't even condemn the bloodshed, the deaths of several humans, and the suffering that their families had to go through. We are yet to take into account the fact that he and the early Muslims carried out dozens of more raids and conflicts.
| |
|
| |
| {{Quote||Salama said that he had not disrobed the daughter of Umm Qirfa when they reached Medina, and again when Muhammad met him in the street, he told that he had not disrobed her. This is enough proof that she was not raped or molested.}}
| |
|
| |
| The fact that Salama says "I had not yet disrobed her" twice in Sahih Muslim 19:4345 is ironically an indicator that disrobing a captive woman was common or at least acceptable at that time. Otherwise, we must wonder why he made such a statement in the first place.
| |
|
| |
| The same Sahih hadith mentions that Abu Bakr first gave the girl to Salama as a '''prize'''. It is now more than obvious how the early Muslims used to treat their female captives.
| |
|
| |
| {{Quote||What happened to Umm Qirfa and her daughter is against the teachings of Islam.}}
| |
|
| |
| If the fate of these women and their tribe is really contrary to the teachings of Islam, why is the story a part of several hadith and sira books? The very purpose of these books is to preach the deeds and habits of Muhammad (the ''sunnah''), his mindset included. Muhammad's followers and their deeds are the fruit of his teachings. Only what he condemned or banned is un-Islamic, and that does not include the persecution of Umm Qirfa and her tribe.
| |
|
| |
|
| ==ref== | | ==ref== |
| {{reflist}} | | {{reflist}} |