Muhammed, “Blonde Women” And Quran 9:49

Donate To Discover The Truth

Kaleef K. Karim

A missionary has written an article on ‘Blonde women’ in relation to Quran 9:49. We won’t mention his name. We will deal with his claims point by point. In the article, he quotes two commentaries in connection to Surah 9:49. The first commentary is from Tafsir al-Tabari:

“Among them is (many) a man who says: “Grant me exemption and draw me not into trial.” Have they not fallen into trial already? And indeed Hell surrounds the Unbelievers (on all sides).
In the commentary regarding the Almighty’s saying, “Among them is (many) a man who says: Grant me exemption and draw me not into trial,” it was mentioned that this verse came down regarding a man named Al-Jadd b. Qais. The Exalted mentioned in this verse, “Among them,” referring to the hypocrites. Regarding the verse, “a man who says: Grant me…” this was in reference to a man who said to the prophet, “Give command that I do not accompany you.” Regarding the verse, “draw me not into trial,” this means, “do not trouble me with the sight of the women of Al-Asfar (“The Yellow,” i.e. blonds) and their daughters, for I am tempted by women, (for I fear) that I might go out and commit a sin with them…” It was narrated by Muhammad Ibn Amru, narrated by Asim, narrated by Issa, narrated by Ibn Abi Najih, narrated by Mujahid regarding Allah’s saying, “Grant me exemption and draw me not into trial,” that the prophet of Allah said, “Invade Tabuk and your spoils will be the daughters of al-Asfar  and the women of the Romans (byzantines).” Al-Jadd replied, “Grant us exemption and draw us not into trial with women.” It was narrated by Al-Qasim, narrated by Al-Hussain, narrated by Hajjaj, narrated by Ibn Jurayj, narrated by Mujahid who stated that the prophet said, “Invade and you will have the spoils of the daughters of al-Asfar” meaning the Roman women and this narration was repeated by others. (Tafsir al-Tabari, Q. 9:49; online source)

Another commentary he provides is from Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi, which can be seen here.

This second commentary, the author who comments on 9:49 does not provide any information where he got this story from. Al-Wahidi was born in the 11th century CE. In Islam, whatever report that gets attributed to Prophet Muhammed (p) has to have a line of transmission from whom the story came from, and if that story can be traced back to Prophet Muhammed (p) himself. Even if the chain can be traced back, those who narrate the story have to be truthful, upright men, and good in memory. If the transmitters are found to be ‘liars’, someone who is not truthful – the report would outright be rejected.

This second commentary (Asbab al-Nuzul by al-Wahidi), it does not provide us with who he heard this story from. So people cannot attribute the quote to Prophet Muhammed without any evidence from whom it came from.

Coming back to the first commentary by al-Tabari, this does have a chain of transmission. But is the story reliable, authentic? Are some of the transmitters ‘truthful’? The short answer is no.

The narrators who transmit this story are deemed by scholars ‘weak’, the report’s are not accepted. In fact, Islamic scholar Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (780 – 855 AD) says some of those who narrate are “liars”.

The following are the names of some of the classical to contemporary scholars who did not accept these reports in Tafsir al-Tabari:

Shaykh Al-Albani (1914 – 1999):

“weak…” (Tarikh Ahadith Fiquh al-Sirah page 406)

Al-Hafiz bin Hajar (1372 – 1449 CE) stated:

“and it was said before that Jad bin Qais was a hypocrite, and Abu Na’im and Ibn mrdodya from Dahaq from ibn Abbas that when god revealed {Permit me [to remain at home] and do not put me to trial} and ibn Mardudia narrated it from Aisha with a WEAK SANAD, and from jabir from a vague and ambiguous sanad. (Al-Isaaba volume 1 page 230)

More scholars:

Hathimi mentioned it in al-Majma’ and said: “and Tabarani mentioned it in al-kabri wa al-awsat and in it is Yahyah al-hamani and he is WEAK“(1) (Mu’ma al-Zawaid volume 7 page 30)

And lastly:

Yahyah bin Abid Hamid al-Hamani, al-Dhahabi commenting about him said, “memorizer hafiz but Munkar (rejected, denounced) and WEAK IN HADITH”

Ibn Abi Ma’id verified that and others did so, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said: HE USED TO LIE in public, and Nasai said he is “WEAK” (2) (al-Muqni Fi al-Du’afa volume 2 page 522) and he made more exploration about him in Tahdeb(3) (Ibid volume 11 page 245)

Reading the above evidence we see the report this missionary tries to pin on Prophet Muhammed (p) is deemed ‘weak’, not accepted, and some of the scholars even called a narrator by the Yahya al-Hamani a ‘liar’.

Reason why our scholars don’t accept it is similar in some way to the Apocrypha. It is like me today trying to give Apocrypha, the Gospel of Thomas for example, legitimacy as being a fact and say, look here – Jesus murdered a child for merely touching his shoulder:

“IV. 1 After that again he went through the village, and a child ran and dashed against his shoulder. And JESUS was provoked and said unto him: Thou shalt not finish thy course (lit. go all thy way). And IMMEDIATELY HE FELL DOWN AND DIED. But certain when they saw what was done said: Whence was this young child born, for that every word of his is an accomplished work? And the parents of him that was dead came unto Joseph, and blamed him, saying: Thou that hast such a child canst not dwell with us in the village: or do thou teach him to bless and not to curse: FOR HE SLAYETH OUR CHILDREN.” (The Infancy Gospel of Thomas – The Apocryphal New Testament” M.R. James-Translation and Notes Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924 – online source)

No sane Christian would accept this. So all we Muslims are asking is be consistent – don’t force us to accept something that is rejected by our classical scholars.

This Tabari commentary (exegesis) the missionary used, a similar story has been reported in Tarikh al-Tabari, but no mention of ‘enticing’ to capture ‘blonde’ woman slaves or any other filthy things he tried to attribute to Prophet Muhammed (p). The report by al-Tabari states:

“…Everyone transmitted what he had learned about the expedition to Tabuk and some people reported whats others did not. All the reports agree, however, that the Messenger of God ordered his companions to prepare for the military expedition against the Byzantines. This was a season when people were hard pressed; the heat was oppressive and the country was passing throuhg a dry spell. At the time, fruit was ripe and shade was dearly sought. People love to stay where they have shade and fruit [trees], and find leaving them distasteful. The Messenger of God would seldom go out on a military expedition without alluding to a destination and announcing [publicly] that he meant [a place] other than that intended.
The Tabuk expedition was the exception, in that he explained [the particulars of the expedition openly] to the people. This was because of the long distance, the difficult season, and THE ENEMY’S NUMERICAL SUPERIORITY. He wanted the people to be fully prepared, so he ordered them to make ready and informed them that his objective was the Byzantines. They prepared themselves despite their dislike for that approach and what it entailed, as well as their respect for the Byzantines and their fighting ability. One day, while the Messenger of God was making preparations for this expedition, he said to Jadd b. Qays, brother of the Banu Salimah: ‘Would you like, O Jadd, to fight the Banu Asfar this year?’ He said: ‘O Messenger of God, please excuse me [from this] and do not tempt me. By God my folk know no better admirer of women than I. I fear that if I see the women of the Banu of Asfar I shall not be able to control myself.’ The Messenger of God turned away from him saying, ‘I excuse you.’ It was about al-Jadd that the following verse was revealed:
‘Among them is a man who says, ‘Grant me exemption [to stay at home] and tempt me not [into trial].’ Have they not already fallen into trial? Indeed hell encompasses the unbelievers.’ [‘Tempt me not’] meant that he feared temptation from the women of the Banu Asfar. But was it not [also] temptation that he had fallen into, by staying behind [while] the Messenger of God [went to battle]? By falling prey to human desires, he had fallen into a greater temptation. Indeed, hell is at his back. (History of al-Tabari: The Last Years Of The Prophet – [Translated And Annotated By Ismail K. Poonawala, Suny – Series in Near Eastern Studies, University Of California, Los Angeles – State University of New York, 1990], volume 9, page 47 – 48)

This is why I sometimes have no respect for these deceitful internet apologist(s). This missionary’s willingness to shamelessly lie and misrepresent our sources is truly reprehensible. He quite clearly knows that the report (exegesis) he quoted is not accepted by our scholars, but yet shamelessly presents it to his readers as a fact, when it is a lie.

When he couldn’t present factual evidence for this, he shamelessly threw in the incident of Awtas. We have responded to this as well, her: “What Happened To The Captive Women In Awtas Incident?”

This missionary presented the weak, and rejected report to his readers to degrade, the impeccable character of Prophet Muhammed (p).

The missionary deceptively showed this report to degrade the Prophet (p) by claiming that he ‘enticed’ his companions to fight the Byzantines for ‘blonde women’ that is waiting there to be ‘slaves’, as he claims. We will come back on the reason why Prophet Muhammed set forth to engage the enemy, Byzantines (Banu Asfar) a little further down.

TURNING TABLES

Let’s now turn tables, on this missionary and show how the Bible – from Old Testament to the New Testament, God (Jesus) allowed, endorsed, and approved the rape of women in war and anywhere else.

The approval, endorsement, and permissibility of rape from the Bible:

Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Good News Translation (GNT)
10 “When the Lord your God gives you victory in battle and you take prisoners, 11 you may see among them a beautiful woman that you like and want to marry. 12 TAKE HER to your home, where she will shave her head, cut her fingernails, 13 and change her clothes. She is to stay in your home and mourn for her parents for a month; after that, you may marry her. 14 Later, if you no longer want her, you are to let her go free. Since you FORCED HER TO HAVE INTERCOURSE WITH YOU, you cannot treat her as a slave and sell her.”

The command that is laid out her by YHWH is when His soldiers go out in war and see a beautiful woman, and the soldier is attracted to her, he can forcefully ‘take’ her to his home and marry the slave-woman.

There was no consent from the slave-woman, whether she accepted this marriage. She was taken forcefully by the soldier, after a month he could do whatever he wishes with her. After the month was over, and the soldier no longer liked her, after exploiting and raping her, he can discard the slave-woman like dirt to fend for herself.

Some may dispute that rape took place because missionaries argue that the Hebrew word ‘anah’ (inna) does not carry the meaning of ‘rape’. For this, please see the following articles where we have written on the Hebrew word ‘anah’ (inna), here, here, here and here. We have shown that the Hebrew word ‘anah’ (inna) does indeed carry the meaning of ‘rape’ and the GNT translation perfectly showed this.

This missionary may even argue that this was the Old Testament, hence they are no longer binding on him as he is a Christian. Even when we look to the New Testament, there are verses that approve of rape.

4 The WIFE DOES NOT HAVE AUTHORITY over her own body (private part), but HER HUSBAND DOES. …” – I Corinthians 7:4

This verse commands that a Christian wife has no authority over her body. The ‘body’ part mentioned here is in reference to her ‘private parts’. The husband here has full right to have sexual relations with his wife even when she refuses. The Christian husband can have forceful sexual intimacy even if the wife refuses. For the wife to refuse this, is a major sin. We would call this in modern terms ‘marital rape’.

The exegesis for I Corinthians 7: 3-4 say that the wife has no right over her private part. The husband can go into her any day, any time he pleases. When the wife got married, her right to her body was longer binding.

Pastor and Bible teacher David Guzik:

“b. On the same idea, also the wife to her husband: The wife is not to withhold marital affection from her husband. Paul strongly puts forth the idea that there is a mutual sexual responsibility in marriage. The husband has obligations toward his wife, and the wife has obligations toward her husband. i. Render to his wife: The emphasis is on giving, on “I owe you” instead of “you owe me.” In God’s heart, sex is put on a much higher level than merely the husband’s privilege and the wife’s duty. c. The wife does not have authority over her own body: In fact, these obligations ARE SO CONCRETE, IT COULD BE SAID THAT THE WIFE’S BODY DOES NOT EVEN BELONG TO HERSELF, BUT TO HER HUSBAND. The same principle is true of the husband’s body in regard to his wife. …” (David Guzik Commentary on the Bible – online source)

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges:

“Verse 4
4. οὐκ ἐξουσιάζει. A.V. hath not power. Better, HATH NO RIGHT. ἐξουσία sometimes stands for power, as in Revelation 9:3. But the more usual sense of the word is AUTHORITY. τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος. OVER HER OWN BODY. Because in everything connected with the duties of married life each should consult the comfort, well-being, and happiness of the other before their own, and should be especially careful that they do not, by any selfishness on the part of either, ‘cause their brother to offend’” (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges – online source)

Heinrich Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament:

“Verse 3-4
ἡ γυνὴ τοῦ ἰδίου σώμ. κ. τ. λ(1073)] Explanatory of 1 Corinthians 7:3. THE WIFE HAS NO POWER OVER HER OWN BODY, NAMELY, AS REGARDS COHABITATION, but THE HUSBAND HAS THAT POWER; likewise ( ὁμοίως) also, on the other hand, the converse holds, so that “neutri liceat alteri conjugale debitum poscenti denegare,” Estius. Corresponding statements of the Rabbins may be seen in Selden, uxor. Hebr. iii. 6, 7. Bengel says happily respecting ἰδίου, that it forms with οὐκ ἐξουσιάζει, an elegans paradoxon.” (Heinrich Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament – online source)

For further comprehensive analysis for I Corinthians 7: 3-4, please click on the following article: ‘New Testament On Rape‘.

With the foregoing in perspective, we need to ask with all sincerity, why does Christian missionary take Jesus (God) the paragon, of mortal virtual, being a role model for all peoples of all places to emulate? What kind of God (Jesus) is this that would allow, endorse the rape, forceful sexual intercourse with women?

Coming to Tabuk expedition, the true, intended reason why Prophet Muhammed (p) chose to engage the Romans (Banu Asfar) was as a result of them trying to murder Muslims. This was the result of Quran 9:29, the revelation. Let’s now look at the earliest most authentic sources what they have say.

Before the Prophet set out to Tabuk expedition, he knew that there would an army there ready and equipped. Sahih Muslim and Riyad –Salihin tells us the following:

“I never remained behind Allah’s Messenger from any expedition which he undertook except the Battle of Tabuk and that of the Battle of Badr. So far as the Battle of Badr is concerned, nobody was blamed for remaining behind as Allah’s Messenger and the Muslims (did not set out for attack but for waylaying) the caravan of the Quraish, but it was Allah Who made them confront their enemies without their intention (to do so). I had the honour to be with Allah’s Messenger on the night of ‘Aqaba when we pledged our allegiance to Islam and it was more dear to me than my participation in the Battle of Badr, although Badr was more popular amongst people as compared with that (Tabuk). And this is my story of remaining back from Allah’s Messenger on the occasion of the Battle of TABUK. Never did I possess means enough and (my circumstances) more favourable than at the occasion of this expedition. And, by Allah, I had never before this expedition simultaneously in my possession two rides. Allah’s Messenger set out for this expedition in extremely hot season; the journey was long and the land (which he and his army had to cover) was waterless and HE HAD TO CONFRONT A LARGE ARMY, so he informed the Muslims about the actual situation (they had to face), so that they should adequately equip themselves for this expedition, and he also told them the destination where he intended to go. …” (Sahih Muslim Book 37, Hadith 6670)

Riyad as-Salihin:

“Abdullah bin Ka’b, who served as the guide of Ka’b bin Malik (May Allah be pleased with him) when he became blind, narrated: I heard Ka’b bin Malik (May Allah be pleased with him) narrating the story of his remaining behind instead of joining Messenger of Allah when he left for the battle of Tabuk. Ka’b said: “I accompanied Messenger of Allah in every expedition which he undertook excepting the battle of Tabuk and the battle of Badr. As for the battle of Badr, nobody was blamed for remaining behind as Messenger of Allah and the Muslims, when they set out, had in mind only to intercept the caravan of the Quraish. Allah made them confront their enemies unexpectedly. I had the honour of being with Messenger of Allah on the night of ‘Aqabah when we pledged our allegiance to Islam and it was dearer to me than participating in the battle of Badr, although Badr was more well-known among the people than that. And this is the account of my staying behind from the battle of TABUK. I never had better means and more favourable circumstances than at the time of this expedition. And by Allah, I had never before possessed two riding-camels as I did during the time of this expedition. Whenever Messenger of Allah decided to go on a campaign, he would not disclose his real destination till the last moment (of departure). But on this expedition, he set out in extremely hot weather; the journey was long and the terrain was waterless desert; and HE HAD TO FACE A STRONG ARMY, so he informed the Muslims about the actual position so that they should make full preparation for the campaign.” (Riyad as-Salihin Book 1, Hadith 21)

The eminent attack from the Byzantines is perfectly shown in the following authentic reports – that the Ghassanid, part of the Byzantine (Banu Asfar) empire were preparing to attack the Muslim community and this news had reached the Muslims.

Sahih al-Bukhari:

“… I left her (and went home). At that time I had a friend from the Ansar who used to bring news (from the Prophet) in case of my absence, and I used to bring him the news if he was absent. In those days we were afraid of one of the kings of GHASSANID TRIBE. We heard that he INTENDED TO MOVE AND ATTACK US, so fear filled our hearts because of that. (One day) my Ansari friend unexpectedly knocked at my door, and said, “Open Open!’ I said, ‘Has the king of Ghassan come?’ He said, ‘No, but something worse; God’s Messenger has isolated himself from his wives.’ …” (Sahih al-Bukhari volume 6, Book 60, Hadith 435)

Sahih Muslim:

“I had a friend from the Ansar. When I had been absent (from the company of the Prophet) he used to bring me the news and when he had been absent I used to bring him the news, and at that time we dreaded a KING OF GHASSAN. It was mentioned to us that he INTENDED TO ATTACK US, AND OUR MINDS WERE HAUNTED BY HIM. My friend, the Ansari, came to me, and he knocked at the door and said: Open it, open it. I said: Has the Ghassanid come? He said: (The matter is) more serious than that. The Messenger of Allah has separated himself from his wives. …” (Sahih Muslim Book 9, Hadith 3508)

Jami at-Tirmidhi:

“‘My house was in Al-Awali among those of Banu Umayya, and I had a neighbour among the Ansar, and he and I would take turns visiting the Messenger of God.’ He said: ‘One day I would visit him and bring the news of the Revelation, and one day he would visit him and bring the same. We heard that GHASSAN WERE PREPARING THEIR HORSES TO ATTACK US. He said: ‘One day he came to me in the evening and knocked on my door, so I went out to him. He said: “A horrible thing has happened.” I said: “Ghassan has come?” He said: “Worse than that. The Messenger of God has divorced his wives.’ … “(Jami` at-Tirmidhi volume 5, Book 44, Hadith 3318)

Ibn Sa’d (784-845 AD) Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir:

“They (narrators) saud: It (report) reached the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, that the ROMANS HAD CONCENTRATED LARGE FORCES IN SYRIA had, that Heraclius had disbursed one year’s salary to his soldiers, and that tribes of Lakhm, Judham, ‘Amilah and Ghassan had joined hands with him. THEY SENT HAD SENT THEIR VANGUARDS TO AL-BALQA. THE MESSENGER Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, SUMMONED THE PEOPLE TO MARCH. He set out and informed them about the place which he intended, so that they could make necessary preparations. He sent (messengers) to Makkah and to the tribes of Arabia (asking them) to send help. This took place in the days of intense heat.” (Ibn Sa’d, Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, volume 2, page 203-204)

Al-Zurqani:

“…It is related that the Apostle got reports of Byzantine forces converging on the northern frontiers of Arabia with the intention of MOUNTING AN ATTACK ON THE MUSLIMS. … the Apostle was informed by the Nabataeans that Heraclius was, after stocking one year’s provisions for his army and drafting the pro-Byzantine tribes of the Lakhm, Judham, Amla and Ghassan under his banner, INTENDING TO COME UPON and that his advance columns had already reached Balqa.” (Al-Zurqani, commentary on Al-Mawahib, volume 3, page 63 – 64)

Aḥmad Ibn Yaḥya al-Baladhuri (D. 892 AD) – ‘Kitab Futuh Al-Buldan’:

“Tabuk make terms. When in the year 9 AH the Prophet marched to TABUK in Syria for the invasion of those of the Greeks, Amilah, Lakhm, Judham and others WHOM HE LEARNT HAD ASSEMBLED AGAINST HIM, he met no resistance. So he spent a few days in Tabuk, whose inhabitants made terms with him agreeing to pay poll-tax.” (Kitab Futuh Al-Buldan, volume 1, page 92)

The exegesis of the Quran also tells us that the Byzantine King with others intended not to just attack Madinah, but was also in negotiations with others to assassinate Prophet Muhammed (p).

A Brief mention on Masjid al-Dirar, to get a better understanding of the context in relation to this event. Masjid al-Dirar was a mosque built by the hypocrites with the help of Abu Amir (Amr), a Christian monk, who had in previous years fought against the Muslims. Abu Amir went to Syria. He had a close relationship with the Byzantine leader. With Abu Amir having hatred and enmity towards Prophet Muhammed (p), he had asked Heraclius to give him men, money, and weapons so that he could assassinate Muhammed (p). With the help of Heraclius, a Mosque was built, and the hypocrites invited the Prophet (p) to come to this Mosque and pray so that they could assassinate him. All this happened before the Tabuk expedition.

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi (d. 1075 AD)

“… The Banu ‘Amr ibn ‘Awf built a mosque at Quba’ and sent for the Messenger of Allah, to come to them. He went there and prayed in that mosque. Their brothers from the Banu Ghunm ibn ‘Awf envied them resentfully and said: ‘Let us built a mosque and send for the Messenger of Allah, to pray in it as he prayed in the mosque of our brothers, and let Abu ‘Amir al-Rahib (the monk) also pray in it when he comes back from Syria‘. This Abu ‘Amir had embraced Christianity and became a monk in the pre-Islamic period. But when the Messenger of Allah, moved to Medina, Abu ‘Amir rejected the religion of Islam and showed enmity toward it. The Prophet, called him then Abu ‘Amir al-Fasiq (the corrupt)… ABU AMIR LEFT FOR SYRIA AND THEN SENT A LETTER TO THE HYPOCRITES in which he wrote: ‘PREPARE YOURSELVES AND MAKE READY WHATEVER YOU CAN OF FORCE AND WEAPONS. Built a Mosque for me, for I AM GOING TO THE CAESAR TO REQUEST HIM TO SEND WITH ME BYZANTINE SOLDIERS SO THAT I DRIVE OUT MUHAMMAD AND HIS COMPANIONS‘. And so, they built for him a mosque by the Quba’ mosque. Those who built this mosque were 12 men: Khidham ibn Khalid (this mosque of opposition was an extension of his house), Tha’labah ibn Hatib, Mu’attib ibn Qushayr, Abu Habibah ibn al-Az’ar, ‘Abbad ibn Hunayf, Jariyah ibn ‘Amir, his two sons Majma’ and Zayd, Nabtal ibn Harith, Bahzaj ibn ‘Uthman, Bijad ibn ‘Uthman and Wadi’ah ibn Thabit. When they finished building this mosque, they went to the Messenger of Allah, and said: ‘We have built a mosque for the sick and the needy and also for use in rainy and wintry nights, and we would like you to come and pray in it’.” (Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi – Surah 9:107 – online source)

Tafsir Ibn Kathir (1301-1373 AD):

“Masjid Ad-Dirar and Masjid At-Taqwa
The reason behind revealing these honorable Ayat is that before the Messenger of Allah migrated to Al-Madinah, there was a man from Al-Khazraj called “Abu `Amir Ar-Rahib (the Monk).” This man embraced Christianity before Islam and read the Scriptures. During the time of Jahiliyyah, Abu Amir was known for being a worshipper and being a notable person among Al-Khazraj. When the Messenger of Allah arrived at Al-Madinah after the Hijrah, the Muslims gathered around him and the word of Islam was triumphant on the day of Badr, causing Abu `Amir, the cursed one, to choke on his own saliva and announce his enmity to Islam. He fled from Al-Madinah to the idolators of Quraysh in Makkah to support them in the WAR AGAINST THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH. The Quraysh united their forces and the bedouins who joined them for the battle of Uhud, during which Allah tested the Muslims, but the good end is always for the pious and righteous people. The rebellious Abu Amir dug many holes in the ground between the two camps, into one of which the Messenger fell, injuring his face and breaking one of his right lower teeth. He also sustained a head injury. Before the fighting started, Abu Amir approached his people among the Ansar and tried to convince them to support and agree with him. When they recognized him, they said, “May Allah never burden an eye by seeing you, O Fasiq one, O enemy of Allah!” They cursed him and he went back declaring, “By Allah! Evil has touched my people after I left.” The Messenger of Allah called Abu Amir to Allah and recited the Qur’an to him before his flight to Makkah, but he refused to embrace Islam and REBELLED. The Messenger invoked Allah that Abu Amir die as an outcast in an alien land, and his invocation came true. After the battle of Uhud was finished, ABU AMIR realized that the Messenger’s call was still rising and gaining momentum, so HE WENT TO HERACLIUS, THE EMPEROR OF ROME, ASKING FOR HIS AID AGAINST THE PROPHET. HERACLIUS GAVE HIM PROMISES AND ABU AMIR REMAINED WITH HIM. He also wrote to several of his people in Al-Madinah, who embraced hypocrisy, promising and insinuating to them THAT HE WILL LEAD AN ARMY TO FIGHT THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH TO DEFEAT HIM AND HIS CALL. He ordered them to establish a stronghold where he could send his emissaries and to serve as an outpost when he joins them later on. These hypocrites built a Masjid next to the Masjid in Quba’, and they finished building it BEFORE the Messenger went to TABUK. They went to the Messenger inviting him to pray in their Masjid so that it would be a proof that the Messenger approved of their Masjid.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir – Surah 9:107 – online source)

Tafsir al-Jalalayn:

“And, among them, those who have chosen a mosque — these were twelve men from among the hypocrites — by way of HARM, to cause distress for those of the mosque of Quba’, and disbelief, since they built it on the orders of the monk ABU ‘AMIR, as a sanctuary for him, so that whoever comes from his side may stay there: HE HAD GONE TO THE BYZANTINE EMPEROR (QAYSAR) TO BRING TROOPS TO FIGHT AGAINST THE PROPHET (s), and to cause division among the believers, who pray in the mosque of Quba’, by having some of these pray in their [the hypocrites’] mosque, and as an outpost, an observation post, for those who waged war against God and His Messenger before, that is, before it was built — meaning the above-mentioned Abu ‘Amir — they will swear: ‘We desired nothing, by building it, but, to do, good’, by way of kindness towards the poor in times of [heavy] rain or [extreme] heat and in order to provide [a place of worship] for the Muslims; and God bears witness that they are truly liars, in this [claim of theirs]. They had asked the Prophet (s) to perform prayers in it, and so the following was revealed…” (Tafsir al-Jalalayn – Suran 9:107 – online source)

In view of all the above evidence presented in connection with Tabuk and Quran 9:29, we see from the reports that the expedition to Tabuk took place as a result of the Byzantine (Banu Asfar) Empire’s army advancing, in attacking the Muslims. Those who claim that Quran 9:29 was revealed to wage war against innocent people are incorrect, as the historical reports for Tabuk have shown.

Conclusion:

What did we learn from this series?

1. Never to take any information from people unless they are verified.
2. Never read anything as fact, do research.
3. We learned that the report the missionary try to degrade Prophet Muhammed was actually weak. Classical scholar Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal called Yahya B. Hamani a ‘liar’. The report was thus rejected, those words could not be attributed to Prophet Muhammed.
4. Missionaries who try degrade Prophet Muhammed (p) should never throw stones when they live in glass houses. The Bible as we showed is full of rape, forced sex against women, that no human would accept as being from God.
5. The Tabuk expedition was a result of the impending army of Byzantine’s (Banu Asfar) who were intending to harm the Muslim community.

Don’t forget to follow Discover The Truth on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favourite social networks.

Credit: Dailyevents.pk

Tagged as: BANU ASFAR, blonde, CONCUBINE, Muhammad, QURAN 9:49, Tabuk