A special “Ruh” from “Allah,” so too a special blessing, for a “special” expressed rage

By Debi Brand

 

These rulings are Allah’s limits….

Those who disagree and oppose Allah and His Messenger will be subdued and overcome as those before them were also subdued and overcome ….We have sent down Clear Signs …. The unbelievers will have a humiliating punishment.

(Surat al-Mujadila: 4 – 5, Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Bewley, Dar Al-Taqwa Ltd, 2007 [Qur’anic text, italicized; exegeses on text, standard].)

 

“‘There will be much, much more of this in America,’” recently wrote Robert Spencer, speaking of the latest come-to-light and high-profile alleged “Honor killing” — for the sake of “Allah” — here in our nation.

And Spencer is right. There will be “much more of this in America.”

Because, as long as, in this nation, there are those who, with deep devotion, aim to practice all the tenets of their Islamic faith; repeatedly, we shall see the results of basic Islam practiced in its entirety. Those results oftentimes seen in “remains.”

Because, as we witness the “believer” in the way of the “Arabian Prophet”  practicing his/her Islam, we will witness them practice the tenet of his/her faith that includes blood-spilling, life-eradicating, body-maiming. Because all of that, providing certain criteria — such as dealing with the perpetrators of the “offences” spoken to in the ayat cited in the opening lines of this post — qualifies as the use of the sword, “for the cause of ‘God.’”

That topic, further spoken to in the now here at posted, Chapter Five (Khalid Masood, no Muslim, mere Muslim, or one among “those who believe”?): The sword promised to “Allah’s Messenger,” Section I,  Section II.

What’s more, that “sword” may be a vehicle, a meat clever, a fixed blade knife, a plastic bag, a side-arm, a shoelace, a fire, etc..

Death delivered by all those “means,” all of that, as stated, providing the existence of certain “offenses,” falls within the limits of obeying Allah and His alleged messenger. Within the limits of following the guidance in, “Therefore when you meet those who disbelieve, strike their necks — meaning “kill them”. Striking people’s necks generally results in their death.” (Surat Muhammad: 4, al-Jalalayn.)

Therefore, if the act results in the death of the offender, it qualifies as having obeyed the above allegedly “Allah” issued command.

And if that one killed, or maimed, is a family member, the act then also falls within the sphere of obeying “Allah’s” command: “fight those disbelievers who are near you, and let them find severity in you….” (9: 124) So too, “Warn your near relatives. This refers to the Banu Hashim and Banu’l-Muttalib … ‘he [Muhammad] called them openly [to Islam].’” (Surat ash-Shu ‘ara: 214, al-Jalalayn.)

He “called them openly [to Islam],” and simultaneously, he warned them of the penalty of their rejecting Islam. And as Qur’an declares, for the Muslim, in the alleged “Messenger of Allah,” you have an excellent model …. – with regard to imitating him in fighting and remaining firm ….” (Surat al-Ahzab: 21, al-Jalalayn.)

The killer in the above-mentioned high-profile “Honor-killing” incident, reportedly, stated, “‘God told him to shoot his wife.’” And thus he did just that…

I’ve no doubt, the god of Muhammad “told him [the said killer] to shoot his wife.”

Because if this killer is the “believer” he presents himself as being, then he knows, his sacred “text” tells him, when one must kill those of your own family and/or community, then, for that act, “Allah” promises you a special visitation of his “spirit.” There, to help you, strengthen you, keep you firm in the acts executed.

Moreover, once you have done the “act,” then, for that special task, “Allah” likewise promises special blessings, as we shall shortly read herein.

For such reasons, also just a few days back, also posted at Jihad Watch, speaking to a similar heartrending story, Spencer wrote, “Welcome to the new, multicultural Britain! There will be much, much more of this in Britain.”

Again, Spencer is right.

Because of what is written in the guidance allegedly provided by the alleged “Prophet of Islam.”

Because the Qur’an declares,  “You will not find those who believe in Allah … having friendship with those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers …  sons … brothers or… clan.”  (Surah Al Mujadlah : 58: [20 -22].)

In that we note, friendship with “fathers,” “sons,” “brothers,” and others will be severed, should any of those “oppose Allah and His Messenger.”

Thus, it begs asking, what qualifies as “opposing Allah and His Messenger”?

Short answer: refusing to comply with Qur’anic guidance is opposing “Allah and His Messenger.”

For such reasons, the Muslim is prodded, commanded to “Obey Allah and the Messenger.” (3:132.) As stated, to disobey Qur’anic commands is to oppose “Allah and the Messenger.” Thus the Muslim is commanded to obey and thus to perform deeds deemed, by Qur’anic measures, that are virtuous.

Therefore, when the would-be good-Muslim, from ahadith reads, “It was narrated that Abu Dharr said: ‘The Messenger of Allah said: “The most virtuous of deeds are loving for the sake of Allah and hating for the sake of Allah,”’” that would-be-good-Muslim would therefore aim to comply with the stated “most virtuous of deeds.”

Thus, he/she would aim to love and hate only for the sake of Allah.

Further, when he/she reads the comments of the scholars following the above hadith, “….This narration indicates that one should hate innovation and those who call to it, for the sake of Allah, as they should love the truth and its people for the sake of Allah,” again, that would-be-good-Muslim would aim to accord with the indicated love and hate.

(Sunan Abu Dawud, First Edition, Darussalam, 2008; Vol. 5, Book of Sunnah, P. 157, # 4599, FN, P. 158 (in order).

Moreover, according to hadith, unless one loves “Allah’s Messenger,” unless one shows that love clearly, affirming that love supersedes love for all others, one is not even counted among the “believers.” Because, according to hadith, the “Prophet” stated, “None of you will believe until I am dearer to him than his own soul.”

(As hadith is cited in Iyad [Qadi], Ibn Musa al-Yasubi,  Ash-Shifa, A. Bewley, Medinah Press, Seventh print, 2008, P. 223 [al-Bukhari] .)

From another, “Anas reported that the Messenger of Allah said, ‘None of you will believe until I am more beloved to him than his children, his father, and all people.’ (Al-Bukhari, Muslim, and an-Nasa’i).”  (Ibid.)  So too, The “Prophet” asserted, “None of you will believe until I am dearer to him than himself.” (Ibid, P. 224.)

One rendition of Sahih Muslim on the above reads this way, narrated by Anas b. Malik: “the Messenger of Allah said: ‘None of you is a believer till I am dearer to him than his child, his father, and the whole of mankind.’”

(Muslim, Sahih, By Imam Muslim, Islamic Book Service, N.Y. First Edition: 2001, Vol. 1, Kitab Al-Iman [The Book of Faith], Chapter on It is Obligatory to Love the Prophet More Than the Members of One’s Household: One’s Child, Father or Even the Whole of Humanity; P. 62, # 44R1.)

“Well,” you say, “What does loving “the prophet” have to do with the acts of the above mentioned killers”?

Here follows, that answer:

If love for the prophet must supersede love  for all the above-stated — in short, “the whole of mankind,” including one’s self — it is clear, every Muslim, be they so-called American Muslim or otherwise, is forbidden to place either love of his country, or love of his countrymen/neighbor, or love of his family-members before his love for his alleged prophet.

Thus we grasp, unless one loves the “Messenger of Allah,”  and, in no area of one’s life opposes him; thus, values and cherishes him — his decisions, his practices, his judgments, etc.– more than all others, including oneself, one’s soul, one’s children, one’s mate — to say nothing of one’s nation or one’s neighbor — then one is no Muslim.

Thus, one is spurred to ask, how does the Muslim affirm this commanded love for the Messenger?

Answer: by producing deeds within the limits established by “Allah.”  Chief deed among those deeds that show honor and regard for those limits is the deed of one refusing to oppose “Allah and His Messenger” in anything, for any reason. For any person.

As tafsir on the verse at the opening of this post provide, on the said “limits set by Allah,” “stress was laid on keeping to Divine limits and to the sacred laws of Islam.”

(Shafi, Maulana Mufti Muhammad, Ma’ariful Qur’an, A Comprehensive commentary on the Holy Qur’an, Translated by Maulana Ahmad Khalil Aziz, Revised by Maulana Muhammad Taqi ‘Usmani; Maktaba-e-Darul- ‘Uloom, Karachi, 14 Pakistan: Vol. 8, Forurth Authorised [sic] Edition, 2007, P. 350.)

Keeping to the “Divine limits” means, for one “to act upon the sacred laws, ordinances and injunctions or obey the commandments of Allah and His Messenger.” (Ibid.)

In other words, keeping to “Divine limits” includes obeying the tacit command of loving and hating only for the sake of Allah.

Thus, we reason, if the love for “Allah” and his messenger is shown in that “one should hate innovation and those who call to it,” we can likewise conclude, it would follow that one should likewise then hate one who embraces and practices innovation.

Innovation, which is, from the Islamic perspective, all that is outside of sunnah of the alleged “Messenger of Allah.” All that counters the traditions and teaching of the alleged “Prophet of Islam.”

Innovations, as those spoken to in Surah Al-A‘raf. Therein referred to in, “Thus do We recompense those who invent lies.” (7:152.)

Qur’an and Tafsir on that inventing of “lies” provide the narrative “Allah” elected to use as an object lesson for the believer to take note of and, thus, from it learn. In that provided narrative, therein finding, the “thus,” in the above-cited verse; the, “this is how we repay those who introduce innovations into religion.”

That being, look to “Those who took the calf (for worship), wrath from their Lord and humiliation will come upon them in the life of this world. Thus do we recommence those who invent lies.” (7:152.)

“Those” referred to above “who took the calf (for worship)” are the Children of Israel.

Thus, they – “Those who took the calf (for worship)” — are the examples to which “Allah” directs the attention of the believer; from the punishment that befell the Children of Israel in that incident, as stated, “Allah” instructs the believers to look to that. Learn from it. From it, take heed and fair warning.

Because what happened to the Children of Israel at the base of Mount Sinai, secondary to their worshiping the calf; as is spoken to in the Book of Exodus of the Hebrew Scripture, as is relayed in numerous surahs of Qur’an; such is the punishment, the cure, the fate “Allah” promises to all who introduced innovations into religion. All who would introduce into Islam other than the teachings and the traditions of the alleged “Prophet of Islam.”

Ergo, what happened in that Sinai incident is well worth knowing.

Given, “The Sheikh Sufya ibn ‘Uyaninah has said that those who invent new things in the Shariah (take to Bid ‘ah) also commit the sin of fabrication and deserve such punishment. [the punishment of the above-mentioned Mount Sinai incident.] (Mazhari)” (Shafi, Ma ‘ariful Quran, Vol. 4, Surah al-Anfal: 152, P. 48.)

And “Imam Malik has also inferred from this verse that those who invent new practices in the Shariah desearve the same punishment of Allah’s wrath in the Hereafer and disgrace in this life. (Qurtubi)” (Ibid.)

The same  tafsir relates, “The verse 153 speaks of the people who repented to Allah for their sin after the admonition of their Prophet.” Following hard after that repentence, the same then “fulfilled the formidable condition of killing each other for their forgiveness.” (Ibid.)

Quid pro quo deal, as it were…

In other words, as the Qur’an and tafsir relate this Sinai incident, “They killed each other as was stipulated in the command of Allah for their forgiveness by Allah.” (Ibid.)

From the Surah Al-A‘raf narration on it, tafsir relates, “The ‘wrath’ mentioned here that struck the Children of Israel because of their worshipping [sic] the calf, means, Allah did not accept their repentance until some of them [who did not worship the calf] killed others [who worshipped the calf].” (Ibn Kathir, Darussalam, Vol. 4, P. 168.)

Ibn Kathir further relates, on the recompense to “those who invent lies,” “By Allah! This Ayah is for all those who invent a lie, until the day of Resurrection.” He continues, “Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah said, ‘Every person who invents a Bid ‘ah (innovation in the religion) will taste disgrace.’” (Ibid, [7:152], P. 169.)

They will, in other words, taste the disgrace the Children of Israel tasted at the base of Mount Sinai — when Moses descended from the mount, drawing near to the camp of the Israelites, and to Joshua who accompanied him, Moses said, “‘the noise of them that sing do I hear.’” (Exodus 32:18.)

Moreover, “ as he came nigh unto the camp … he saw the calf,” so too, “… the dancing …. And … that the people were naked,” and Moses became enraged. (Exodus 32: 19, 25 respectively.)

His “anger waxed hot.” (Ibid [32: 19].)

As spoken to in Surah Baqarah, “Musa said to his people ….turn in repentance to your Creator and slay yourselves.” (2:54.)

That meaning, as spoken to above, “this verse describes the specific mode of offering their Taubah (repentance) which was prescribed for the Israelites in this situation, — that is to say, those who had not indulged in the worship of the golden calf should execute those who had.” (Shafi, Ma’ariful Qur’an, Vol. 1, P. 214.)

Tafsir on the verse there likewise relating, as it was in the above incident with the Israelites, “Similarly, in the Islamic Shari‘ah too, certain major sins entail capital punishment even when the sinner has offered this Taubah ….” (Ibid.)

Words of “Musa,” as related from Surat Al-Araf:  “What an evil thing you did in my absence.” (Al-Jalalayn 7: 150.)

Tafsir al-Jalalayn renders verse 152 this way:

 

As for those who adopted the Calf, as a god, anger and punishment from their Lord will overtake them together with abasement in the life of this world. They were punished by the command to kill themselves [sic] and were abased in the life of this world until the Day of Rising. That is how we repay the purveyors of falsehood ….              (7: 152.)

 

As ibn Kathir renders the verse: “Surely, those who have taken the calf (as god) upon them shall befall the wrath of Allah, and humiliation in the worldly life.” (Surah Al-Araf 7: 152, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 4.)

Verse 153 relates, “And when the fury of Musa quieted down, he picked up the Tablets, and in its contents there was guidance, and mercy for those who are fearful.” (Shafi, Ma’ariful Qur’an, Vol. 4, P. 47.)

That guidance and mercy, according to Islam, that that played out and is spoken to in the Exodus Scripture, that earlier mentioned: “…Moses told the Levites, ‘Jehovah the God of Israel says, “Get your swords and go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other and kill even your brothers, friends, and neighbors.”’

“So they did ….for the service of the Lord … obeyed Him … even though it meant killing … [their] own sons and brothers;” and in so doing, thus, earned, “a great blessing.” (Exodus 32: 27-29, Living Bible rendition.)

That the “Allah” referred to object lessons as provided in the Book of Exodus.

Referring back now to the above-mentioned Britain incident of “Honor Killing” — the summary of that horrific incident, this statement provides: “‘My best friend’s parents suffocated her with a plastic bag and made her siblings watch – all because she was wearing a short-sleeved T-shirt.’”

How could such actions count as blessed in the eyes of “God”? How could parents who profess to “Love and fear” “God” do such acts, moreover, do them with a “good” clear conscience?

Here’s how: in the hatred that the parents clearly had and thus fully expressed for their daughter, Shafilea, and her western ways; in “calling her a ‘prostitute’ and a ‘whore’ and beating and starving her as a punishment,”  then, ending her “wayward” ways; they were fulfilling the above-cited command to love and hate only for the sake of “Allah.”

They were complying with the Qur’an provided instructions on how to deal with those who introduce innovations into their Islam. Those who reject and oppose “Allah and His Messenger.” Those who stray beyond the “Divine limits.”

Thus, in those horrific acts, they were perfectly compliant with the way of the alleged “Prophet of Islam.” Perfectly in line with his prescribed and sanctioned practice. Hating the innovation as well as hating the one embracing and practicing it.

Therefore, dealing out to the said perpetrator of introducing or practicing “a Bid ‘ah (innovation in the religion),” the Qur’an provide “recompense” for those guilty of such.

Because as Sunan Abu Dawud provides, the alleged “Messenger of Allah” commanded: “Whoever among you lives after I am gone … you must adhere to my Sunnah and the way of the Rightly Guided Khulafa. Hold on to it and cling fast to it. ” (Sahih.)  (Dawud, Val. 5, The Book of Sunnah, P. 162, #4607.)

Then, the hadith warns, “And beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a deviation.” (Ibid.)

In another, narrated by ‘Aishah: “The Messenger of Allah said, ‘Whoever introduces something into this matter of ours that is not part of it, he will have it rejected.’” (Sahih). Ibid, P. 161, # 4606.)

The “this matter of ours” spoken of above speaks to the laws, guidance, precepts, and practices found, commanded, portrayed in the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

Therefore, from the above, we note, on the authority of their “Holy Prophet,” the Muslim is commanded to hate all laws, guidance, precepts and practices not found or that are incongruent with that in The Qur’an and Sunnah.

He/she is likewise commanded to hate all who call to other than Qur’an and Sunnah laws, guidance, precepts, and practices. For such reasons, “Muslims” who dare to oppose the traditions of the alleged “Prophet of Islam,” oftentimes are among those who meet horrific blood-filled violent deaths.

Oftentimes, they meet that end at the hands of the “believers” nearest to them. Thus, oftentimes, for the cause of “Allah,” the said “guilty” are thus killed by kith and kin.

Because “Allah’s Book” declares, Allah says, “Say, if your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your tribe and your possessions you have earned, commerce you fear may slacken, dwellings you love – if these are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and to struggle in His way, then wait until Allah brings his command.”

(Surah 9:25 [in some renditions, vs.: 24], as verse is rendered in Qadi Iyad, Ibn Musa al-Yasubi, Ash-Shifa, Muhammad Messenger of Allah,  A.Bewley translation, Medinah Press, Cape Town, South Africa, Seventh print, 2008, P. 215.)

Therefore, according to Islamic doctrine, if you love the alleged “Holy Prophet” — as every Muslim is command to do — you will love his sunna; If you love his sunnah, it then follows, you will implement that sunnah.

Therefore, you will follow this practice, because it is sunnah: “Anyone who doubts a single letter which Muhammad, may Allah bless and grant him peace, brought, is a denying unbeliever.” And “the judgment against anyone who rejects the Prophet is that he is killed.”  (Ibid, P. 387.)

“Anyone,” to include, your wife, your brother, your son, your daughter, your neighbor, your boss, on down the line…

Because as the Qur’an declares, as mentioned in the earlier parts of this post, “You will not find those who believe in Allah … having friendship with those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers … sons … brothers or… clan.” (Surah Al Mujadlah : 58: [20 -22].)

On that, tafsir of Ibn Kathir provides, “Sa ‘id bin ‘Abdul-Aziz and others said,” the verse “was revealed in the case of Abu ‘Ubayday ‘Amir bin ‘Abdullah bin Al-Jarrah….” (Kathir, Tafsir, Darussalam, Vol. 9, P. 538.)

“He [Abu ‘Ubaydah] killed his disbelieving father, during the battle of Badr.” (Ibid.) Other sources state the said slaying happened during the battle of Uhud. Be where/when it was, it is clear, for his love for the “prophet,” Abu ‘Ubaydah killed his disbelieving father.

And did so with the blessing and approval of “the prophet.” Therein providing an emulation-worthy sunna.

For such reasons, as ibn Kathir provides, concerning  Abu ‘Ubaydah’s slaying of his father, in that act, he earned not only the praise and approval of  “Allah and his Messenger,” but also, therewith merited immense honor from  ‘Umar ibn Al-Khattab.

As ibn Kathir relates, it was because of that slaying, “when Umar ibn Al-Khattab placed the matter of Khilafah in the consultation of six men after him, he said, ‘If Abu ‘Ubaydah were alive, I would have appointed him the Khilafah.” (Ibn Kathir, Vol, 9, P. 538.)

Why?

Because of the exemplary example ‘Ubaydah provided for the believers on how they must show their Islam, thus show love for their “prophet” — in short, as stated above, show clear-cut expressed hatred for all who oppose “Allah and His Messenger.”

Chief among those deserving your best portion of purified hatred: those near you. Kith and kin.

Ergo, same source provides, in speaking to the “‘or their sons’” portion of the verse, that “was revealed in the case of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq when he intended to kill his (disbelieving) son, ‘Abdur-Rahman, (during the battle of Badr).” (Ibid, P. 539.)

Further, the same relates, the “‘or their brothers’ was revealed about the case of Mus ‘ab bin ‘Umayr, who killed his brother, ‘Ubayd bin ‘Umayr, during Badr.” (Ibid.)

And regarding the “‘or their kindred’” portion of that verse, Ibn Kathir relates, it “was revealed about the case of ‘Umar, who killed one of his relatives during Badr, and also this Ayah was revealed in the case of Hamzah, ‘Ali and Ubaydah bin Al-Harith.” (Ibid.)

All of those mentioned there, affirms the Islamic record, “They killed their close relatives ‘Utbah, Shaybah and Al-Walik bin ‘Utbah that day.” That day, “The Day of Badr.” (Ibid.)

That day, as Ibn Ishaq relates in citing Surah-Anfal verse 38 (“‘Say to those who disbelieve, if they cease, they will be pardoned for what is passed, and if they return, to fight you….) ‘the example of the ringleaders has been made.’ i.e. those who were killed at Badr.”

(Ishaq, Surat al-Anfal: 38, as cited by Ibn Ishaq, The Coming Down of Surah Anfal, P. 322.)

Indeed, that day, “the day of Badr,” that epochal “day” in Islamic history, in which, for Islam, indispensable examples were made.

Because it was “the day of Badr,” when, the Muhajirun — “The Companions of the Messenger of Allah who accepted Islam in Mecca and made hijra to Medina” — among the Muslim army showed, proved, they were if not eager, then, minimally, willing, for the cause of Islam, to kill those near them.  (Bewley, Glossary, P, 44.)

Kill their blood relatives as well as their former neighbors.

Moreover, soon enough, affirming that same deep “devotion” to Islam, the Ansar would likewise sign their names, as it were, to this then new Islam-produced agreement. Therein affirming, with quill, if you will, dipped in the inkwell filled with the shed blood of their kith and kin; allegiance to no one — not to tribe, not to clan, not to family, not to any one — would supersede allegiance to Islam. (al-Waqidi, and others.)

Thus affirming, devotion to Islam, unless shared devotion, it negated former alliances and ties. Irrespective of with whom those ties were.

Islam changed hearts.

Thus, in the words of Ansari, ‘Ubada b. al-Samit, speaking to “the Qaynuga,” as he, at “the command of the Messenger of God,”   “imposed departure and exile on them,” his former allies; “Islam has erased the agreement.” (Al-Waqidi, P. 89.) In other word, unless love and allegiance to Islam is shared, Islam has erased from the heart, any trace of natural affection for one’s former ally, one’s brother, one’s mate, one’s child, one’s neighbor, ect.

Therefore, as noted, the indispensable examples provided at Badr — object lessons, and teaching moments for the Muslim; lessons that “Allah and His Messenger” have provided for the “believer.”

Because, it was at Badr, concerning the captives the Muslims had seized, ibn Kathir relates, the alleged Messenger of Allah “consulted with his Companions about what should be done with the captives….” (Ibn Kathir, Vol 9, P. 539.)

And from the ranks of those unparalleled exemplary “believers,” fully aware in the ranks of the captives “were … [their] cousins, and … [their] kindred,” from Abu Bakr came the argument to spare their lives. Do so, he posed, for a ransom received, “so the Muslims could use the money to strengthen themselves.” Tabling, that later, just perhaps, they too might embrace Islam.  (Ibid.)

As al-Waqidi relates it, the party of the captives had in fact sent for Abu Bakr. Did so reasoning, “for indeed he is the closest relative to the Quraysh.” (Al-Waqidi, al-Maghazi, Routledge, First Edition, 2011, P. 54.)

Thus, reads the narrative, “So they sent for Abu Bakr.” And “when he came to them,” they appealed to Abu Bark thusly: “ ‘O Abu Bakr, with us are your fathers, sons, brothers, uncles, and sons of uncles. The farthest of us is a relative to you.” (Ibid.)

Thus, they begged of Abu Bakr, “ Speak to your companion [“Messenger of Allah”]  so that he will be kind to us and permit the payment of our ransom.’” (Ibid.)

And to that Abu Bakr answered, “‘Yes, if God wills, I will stop at nothing for your good.’” (Ibid.)

Then the record indicates, the captives, apparently concerned ‘Umar b.al-Khattab might, as they put it to Abu Bakr, “[‘Umar might] spoil your plan,” they summoned Umar to the scene. (Ibid.)

Thus, “they said to him as they had said to Abu Bakr.”

But unlike the benevolent answer the captives had received from Abu Bakr, not the same would be rendered from ‘Umar b.al-Khattab. ‘Umar said to the captives of his non-Muslim relatives, “‘I will never desist from harming you.’” (Ibid.)

Then, making his argument to “the Prophet,” he said precisely why, stating, “ ‘O Messenger of God they are the enemy of God. They did not believe in you and they fought you….Cut off their heads.” (Ibid.)

As Ibn Kathir relates it, ‘Umar, stated, “‘I have a different opinion, O Allah’s Messenger!’” (Ibn Kathir, Vol 9, P. 539.)

And that opinion was, provided ‘Umar,  “‘Let me kill so-an-so, my relative, and let ‘Ali kill ‘Aqil (Ali’s brother), and so-and-so kill so-and-so. Let us make it known,’” he argued convincingly, “make it know to Allah that we have no mercy in our hearts for the idolaters.’”  (Ibid.)

“No mercy … for the idolaters,” be they who they may: fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, and on down the family line and elsewhere.

Killing, for “the cause,” those who fight and resist the way of “the Prophet,” be the said guilt those of “your community and family” — because such were the irreplaceable lessons from Badr. (Ibid; Waqidi, Ibid.)

Such were the examples, indelible teaching moments of Islam, provided at Badr: killing kith and kin for the cause of “Allah and His Messenger.” Loving and hating kith and kin, again, only for the cause of “Allah and His Messenger.”

For such reasons, tafsir relates, on verse 58:22 earlier cited, “this verse describes the condition of sincere believers.” That being, they are those only who “would not take an enemy of the Faith, the opponents of Allah, for intimacy and friendship, even though such people are their own fathers, children, brothers or any other blood relatives.”
(Shafi, Ma ‘ariful Qur’an, Vol. 8, P. 363.)

“The bond of belief,” overriding all other reasons for ties and affection. Thus, if not enforcing those bonds buy shared “Faith,” then eradicating them all together. Thus, “the bond of belief transcends all other bonds, even the close ties of blood.” (Ibid.)

And that, relates tafsir and numerous narratives, that “description fits all noble Companions.” (Ibid.)

Thus that is the model of behavior for every would-be Good Muslim to look to.

For such reasons, the following:

Commentators on this occasion have cited a number of incidents of the blessed Companions which describe how, when they heard their fathers, sons and brothers or other blood relations utter blasphemy against Islam or the Messenger of Allah [may Allah bless and grant him peace], they left all ties aside and punished them or even killed them.” (Ibid.)

Therefore, tafsir declares, “The biography of the blessed Companions is replete with similar incidents. The present set of verses was revealed to laud them. [Qurtubi].” (Ibid, P. 364.)

Laud the said “blessed Companions” for their example and demonstration of the commanded fervent love of their “prophet” every Muslim should possess. Be governed by. Their nonparallel examples of love and hate only for the sake of “Allah.” Thus their like-kind example of expressed hatred for all who oppose “Allah and His Messenger.”

Speaking to that same example of the called for all-governing degree of “love,” Qadi Iyad likewise provides:  “His [the Prophet’s] Companions killed their loved ones and fought their fathers and sons to gain the pleasure of the Prophet.” (Iyad, P. 228.)

Iyad provides, on Abdullah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Ubayy, mentioned above, he said to the “prophet,” of his (ibn Ubayy’s)  father, “‘If you had wanted, I would have brought you his head (his father’s) .” (Ibid.)

From another page, same authoritative source, speaking to the same: “Ibn Qani related that a man came to the Prophet and said: ‘Messenger of Allah, I heard my father say something ugly about you, so I killed him,’ and that did not distress the Prophet.’” (Ibid, P. 378.)

Of course, it did not distress the “Prophet.”  Because as Qadi Iyad likewise relates, “Another sign [of the called-for love of “the prophet”] is hatred for anyone who hates Allah and His Messenger.” (Ibid, P. 228.)

Thus, the alleged “ugly” words uttered by the father of Ibn Qani, those words bespoke the man’s lack of love and reverence for the alleged prophet. Therefore, the hatred noted and displayed by Ibn Qani was not only not distressing to “the prophet” but also pleasing to him.

Therefore, that murder justified by the so-called prophet, because of words the said father uttered.

Because as Iyad provides, another sign of the called-for love of “the Prophet” is  “having enmity towards all  who have enmity towards him, avoidance of all those who oppose his sunna and introduce innovations into his deen….” It is thus, “finding every matter contrary to his shari’a burdensome. “ He notes, for that reason, “Allah says, ‘You will not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day who are loving to anyone who opposes Allah and His Messenger.’” (Ibid [58:22].)

Thus, we regard, oftentimes, one “speaks” tacitly via one’s actions and conduct. Therefore, from the Islamic measure, if the actions and conduct of an individual denote enmity and opposition to the Sharia of Islam; those actions bespeak “blasphemy” against Islam and its alleged “Messenger.” Thus, the act has been done. The guilty one so judged.

Ergo, if one’s actions declare, concerning Muhammad and the “religion” he brought, “This is garbage!” then that declaration has been made. The offence clear as day. So too, to the believer, the payment due the offender.

Therefore, as cited in the name of this post, for such “challenging” acts as dealing with those near you who so oppose “Allah and the Messenger,” for those “sincere” believers executing the punishment due the said guilty; “Allah” promises the needed provisions, so too, special blessings, and providence, here, as well as in the hereafter.

Thus for those who produce such demonstrations of this “devotion” to “Allah,” so too, of the called-for love and hate only for the sake of “Allah”; for the act, for the moment, for the time that follows it; “Allah” assures the “believer”  “For such He has written faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with Ruh from Himself.” (Ibn Kathir, Al-Mujadilah [58]:22, Vol. 9, P, 540.)

As Ibn Kathir provides, “those who have the quality of not befriending those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, may Allah bless and grant him peace, even if they are their fathers, or brothers, are those whom Allah has decreed faith.” (Ibid, P. 539.)

That meaning, it is to those biddable, if you will, for such deep devotion, “Allah” has decreed “happiness in their hearts,” having “made faith dear to their hearts.” So much so, that in spite of killing their own, “ happiness” resided in their hearts. (Ibid [P. 540].)

Thus, for the act of killing their own, “Allah,” “[Himself]…He gave them strengths.” (Ibid.)

That “Ruh from Himself,” that visitation of the spirit of the god of the Qur’an, that is what enabled these “believers” to perform such acts. That spirit is/was (will be) that that strengthens and enables the believing Muslim, for the cause of “Allah,” to slay their own.

Ruh,” provide the scholars, “according to some authorities on Tafsir,” the word “stands for ‘light.’” Moreover, a light no less, “which radiates or emanates from Allah and enters the heart of a believer.”  (Shafi, Ma ‘ariful Qur’an, Vol. 8,P. 364.)

Moreover, the scholars add, once having entered that heart, that “light” “urges him [the ‘believer’] to perform righteous deeds.” As in, to perform the earlier spoken of “most virtuous of deeds.” (Ibid.)

Thus that Ruh enables and steadies the “believer” to perform deeds that bespeak love and hate only for the sake of “Allah.” Thus, perform deeds in kind with the deeds of the alleged “blessed Companions” as their deeds spotlighted above.

For the sincere believers following the examples provided in those “blessed acts,” tafsir provides, in that promised “Ruh,” “Allah” is promising, to them, for their performed like-kind acts; the god of Muhammad, the god of the “blessed Companions,” during the act, after the act, he will be to the believer, their “source of peace and contentment of the heart.” (Ibid.)

For performing such “challenging”  “blessed” acts, the god of Muhammad and his Companions promises, he will provide to the believer, “tranquility and satisfaction.” And that will yield to that believer that needed for such acts: “great strength and power.” (Ibid.)

Thus, Qur’an declares, was the examples provided at Badr; thus will be in all actions that follow in-kind with that object lesson:  “‘you will not kill them but God will kill them.’” (Al-Waqidi, 8:17, as verse is rendered in text, P. 67.)

You desire the temporal goods (Q.8:67): He [‘God’] means the ransom. But God desires the hereafter. He desires that they be killed.’” (Ibid, P. 69.)

Moreover, as al-Waqidi (and others) relates, the verse, “We shall seize you with a mighty onslaught (Q. 44: 16): Refers to the Day of Badr.” (Ibid.)

As stated, that the day in which the Muslims showed, for the love of “Allah and His Messenger,” they would happily slay their own. “We shall seize you with a mighty onslaught,” that, the promise this nonparallel swath of “believers” made to members of their family and community.

And to the same, “Taste the penalty for your disbelief: [again] Referring to the day of Badr.’” (Ibid, P. 67.) (Q.8:14.)

So too, of the same killings of kith and kin: “And grant me from Your presence an authority to help, (Q.17:80): [again, speaking of the fratricidal killings at Badr]: the day of Badr.” (Ibid, P. 69.)

For such reasons, for those who perform such acts of deepest devotion, “Allah” declares, he “is well pleased with them, and they are well pleased with Allah.” (Ibn Kathir, Al-Mujadilah [58]:22, Vol. 9, P, 540.)

That verse, provides Ibn Kathir, “contains a beautiful secret.” That being,  “When the believers became enraged against their relatives and kindred in Allah’s cause, He compensated them by being pleased with them and making them pleased with Him from what He granted them….” (Ibid.)

That granted: “eternal delight, ultimate victory and encompassing favor,” because these “sincere believers” are, by Islamic standards deemed, “… servants who are worthy of earning His honor.” (Ibid.)

Hence, the misnomer, “Honor-killings.”

As stated, the concept finds validity and vigor from that spoken to in Surat Al-Baqarah, Surah Al-Araf, and elsewhere in Qur’an. That spoken to above.

This special visitation of that “presence,” that special provision of “power and strength” for the hour, that unique provision of “an authority” to over-power the “guilty,” deal out “Allah’s” punishment to those near you, it hails from the story above spotlighted of the Children of Israel. Of the punishment that was theirs, as cited, because of their worshiping  the golden calf they made at Mount Sinai.

As provided above, that is the story to which the Qur’an refers the attention of the believer to, to find instructions on how believers should deal with those who introduce innovations [non-sunnah compliant acts] into their, alleged, Islam.

As cited, for “God …Get your swords, and go back and forth from one end of the camp to the other and kill even your brothers, friends, and neighbors.’” And in so doing, earn, “a great blessing.” (Exodus 32: 27-29, Living Bible rendition.)

Ergo, at Badr, this was the army of Muhammad, snatching up for themselves, as it were, title deed to and possession of “the sword of the Lord.”

This is that spoken to, as above mentioned, in soon-to-post here, “The sword promised to “Allah’s Messenger,” Chapter Five of the series, “Khalid Masood, no Muslim, mere Muslim, or one among “those who believe”?

 

Comments are closed.