www.ansar.org claims that it is only a fabrication (made by Shias) that Khalid married the widow of Malik. Then it tries to de-authenticate Historic traditions.
Please Note:
1. Firstly ansar.org didn't brought all the Historic Traditions in light (they presented only 3 Historic Traditions and claimed there exist only these 3 traditions).
While reality is this there are more historic traditions which mention this incident.
2. Secondly, according to ALL Sunni Ulama, the standards of "Hadith" could not be applied to "History". This is long discussion and I will deal with it in next post. Insha-Allah.
Evidences of Khalid taking's Malik's Widow as wife
First Tradition:
at-Tabarî— (narrrates from)— as-Sarî ibn Yahyâ— (who narrrates from) — Shu‘ayb ibn Ibrâhîm— (who narrrates from)— Sayf ibn ‘Umar— (who narrrates from)— Sahl (ibn Yûsuf)— (who narrrates from)— Qâsim (ibn Muhammad) and ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb, who say...
"Khâlid married Umm Tamîm the daughter of Minhâl, and left her till her clean period ended."
Reference: Târîkh at-Tabarî vol. 2 p. 273 (Dâr al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut 1408/1988)
Note:
Here Ansar.Org claimed that this narration is weak due to "Sayf Ibn Umar".
Please keep in mind that "Sayf" was a Nasibi and he created whole Book in order to defend Uthman and Bani Umiyyah.
"Sayf" is labeled weak in "Hadith" but he is accepted in History by Sunni Historians. Just look at Ibn Katheer who narrated a lot lot lot from Sayf in his history book "Al-Badayah wa Al-Nahayah". All other Sunni Historians also narrated heavily from Sayf.
We Shias reject Sayf's self-created fantasy story of Abdullah Ibn Saba and his role, which all is collected in Sayf's book on this Issue. But as far as a hundreds of other Historic Traditions from Sayf are concerned, then they could not be thrown in dustbin as there are Traditios from other transmitters too who are telling the same Incidents.
So, in simple words, both Sunni and Shia Ulama accept those Traditions of Sayf which are also narrated by other Transmitters.
(Note: Sayf if alone in narrating about Role of Abdullah Ibn Saba against Uthman. There is no other Transmitter which reported any kind of Role of Ibn Saba against Uthman. Therefore this fantasy book of Sayf is totally rejected)
*****************
Second Tradition:
at-Tabarî— (narrrates from)— (Muhammad) ibn Humayd (ar-Râzî)— (who narrrates from) — Salamah (ibn al-Fadl ar-Râzî)— (who narrrates from)— Muhammad ibn Ishâq— (who narrrates from)— Talhah ibn ‘Abdillâh ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahmân ibn Abî Bakr— who says that it used to be Abû Bakr as-Siddîq’s instruction to his armies...
"....‘Umar told Khâlid: “You enemy of Allâh! You killed a Muslim man and thereafter took his wife. By Allâh, I will stone you.”
Reference: Târîkh at-Tabarî vol. 2 p. 274
Again Ansar.Org using the weapon of De-Authentication. Therefore they are criticizing Ibn Ishaaq for tadlees.
But biggest problem in Ansar.Org's approach is this that they are once again applying the Standards of "Hadith" upon "History". Ibn Ishaaq has been criticized in "Hadith", but as far as "History" is concerned then he has been deemed authentic by Sunni Authorities (and especially no problem in accepting a Historical Event by him when same thing has been narrated by other sources too.
*****************************
3rd Tradition
Ibn Hajar quoted it from a source called ad-Dalâ’il byThâbit ibn Qâsim:
"Khâlid saw the wife of Mâlik ibn Nuwayrah. She was very beautiful. Thereupon Mâlik told his wife, “You have killed me,” meaning that she will be the cause of his death. And so it happened."
Reference: Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani, al-Isâbah vol. 6 p. 37
Note:
During History, lot of books have been lost.
But if we find their references at other places in other books, then it doesn't mean these reports/references have to be thrown into Dustbin while original Sources have been lost in History.
Therefore, even if this book "al-Dalail" by Thabin bin Qasim is non-existant today, but still this reference by Ibn Hajar has weight while this report is authenticated by many other existance Traditions too about Khalid marraige with Malik's Widow.
So, better for Ansar.Org to See this Tradition in light of other Traditions instead of throwing it into dustbin in name of not finding this book today.
Please also note, this incident of Khalid marrying Malik's widow was so much famous and common that none of Sunni Historian rejected it. Therefore Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also narrated it normally from Thabit bin Qasim without criticizing it in any way. (Perhaps Ansar.Org are the first one in 1400 Years old Islamic History who tried to reject this incident)
********************
4th Tradition
Hafiz Ibn Asakir records:
فلما دخل خالد بن الوليد المدينة دخل المسجد وعليه قباء عليه صدأ الحديد متقلدا السيف معتما في عمامته أسهم فمر بعمر فلم ف يكلمه ودخل على أبي بكر فرأى منه كلما يحب فخرج مسرورا فعرف عمر أن أبا بكر قد أرضاه فأمسك عن كلامه وإنما كان وجد عمر عليه فيما صنع بمالك بن نويرة من قتله إياه وتزوج امرأته وما كان في نفسه قبل ذلك من أمر بني جذيمة
‘…When Khalid arrived at Madina, he entered the mosque of Allah's Messenger wearing rusty armor and with his sword. There were some arrows in his turban, he passed by Umar but didn’t talk to him, then he came to Abu Bakr, and he heard from Abu Bakr what pleased him, he then left happy. Umar therefore knew that Abu Bakr had pleased him, therefore he didn’t talk to him (Khalid). Umar was angry at him (Khalid) because of what he had done, by killing Malik bin Nuwayrah and marrying his wife and also for what was in his heart against him (Khalid) about Bani Jadhima case’ Online: Tarikh Ibn Asakir, Volume 16 page 258
ٰIt is a Sahih Tradition:
Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Abdulbaqi: Dahabi said: ‘Musnad of his time’ (Siar alam alnubala, v20 p23), Albaani said: ‘Thiqah’ (Silsila Daeefa, v4 p361). Al-Hassan bin Ali al-Johari: Dahabi said: ‘Seduq’ (Siar alam alnubala, v18 p68), Khatib Baghdadi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh Baghdad, v7 p393). Muhammad bin Abbas bin Hayweh: Dahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Siar alam alnubala, v16 p409), Khatib Baghdadi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarih Baghdad, v3 p121). Ahmad bin Maroof: Dahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh al-Islam, v24 p102), Khatib Baghdadi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh Baghdad, v5 p368). Al-Hussain bin Fehm: Dahabi said: ‘Huge Hafiz’ (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v2 p680), Khatib Baghdadi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tarikh Baghdad, v8 p91). Muhammad bin Saad: Dahabi said: ‘Seduq’ (Al-Kashif, v2 p174), Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p79). Muhammad bin Umar Waqidi. Muhammad bin Abdullah: Dahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Siar alam alnubala, v7 p197), Ibn Hajar said: ‘Seduq’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p99). Al-Zuhari: Dahabi:'The Hafiz of his time' (Sial alam alnubala, v5 p326), Ibn Hajar said:'There is an agreement on his magnificence' (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p133). Handalah bin Ali: Dahabi said:‘Thiqah’ (Al-Kashif, v1 p358), Ibn Hajar said:‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p250).
***************************
5th Tradition:
Imam of Ahle Sunna Mullah Muttaqi Hindi (d. 975 H) in his famed work Kanz ul Ummal quoted a tradition from the esteemed Sunni work 'Tabaqat al Kubra' by Imam Ibn Saad which was sufficient to unveil the actual role of Khalid in the case of Malik bin Nuwayrah but the Sahabah worshippers could not tolerate this and tampered with 'Tabaqat al Kubra' and removed it. But, the presence of this tradition in Kanz ul Ummal shall make our readers realize why it was essential that the children of Muawiyah delete the primary source. We read the following tradition in Kanz ul Ummal:
Ibn Abi Aun and others narrated that Khalid bin al-Walid claimed that Malik bin Nuwayrah had become Murtad according to the information that he (Khalid) had received. Malik denied this and said: 'I am a Muslim, I never changed.' Abu Qutada and Abdullah ibn Umar testified that (Malik is Muslim) but Khalid ordered Dharar bin Al-Auzwar to behead him (Malik). Then Khalid took his (Malik's) wife. (Umar) said to Abu Bakr: 'He (Khalid) has performed adultery, you have to stone him'. Abu Bakr said: 'I can't stone him; he interpreted hence made a mistake'. (Umar) said: 'Then dismiss him'. He (Abu Bakr) said: 'I cannot put the sword back in the sheath which Allah has pulled out on my opponents.'(Ibn Sa'ad).
Online: Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 5 page 619 Tradition 14091
*********************
Acceptance by the Sunni scholars of Khalid's crime
As stated above, Khalid's crime of marrying Malik's widow was so common in History that no body refuted it. Many Sunni Historians and Ulama confirmed it in their writings.
Imam Ibn Abdul Barr gives a very diplomatic response about Khalid's crime in Al-Istiab, Volume 3 page 1362:
واختلف فيه هل قتله مسلما أو مرتدا وأراه والله أعلم قتله خطأ
There is disagreement about him (Malik) did he (Khalid) kill him as a Muslim or Murtad. In my opinion he (Khalid) was mistaken in killing him and Allah knows best.Allamah Zamakhshari states in Al-Faiq, Volume 3 page 65:
وقد تزوجها خالد بعد قتل زوجها فأنكر ذلك عليه
Khalid married her after her husband's murder and he (Khalid) has been condemned for that.Let us now read the views of the beloved scholar of Nawasib Ibn Kathir who in his book Sirah al-Nabawyiah, Volume 3 page 595 stated:
ولهذا لم يعزله الصديق حين قتل مالك بن نويرة أيام الردة ، وتأول عليه ما تأول حين ضرب عنقه واصطفى امرأته أم تميم
Therefore the Sidiq (Abu Bakr) didn't dismiss him (Khalid) when he killed Malik bin Nuwayrah during the days of Reda, because he (Khalid) interpreted when he beheaded him and took his wife Um Tamim.If you read any polemical article written by Ansar.Org, they will seek continual reliance upon the writings and views of Ibn Kathir. To them, he is the sole word of authority for the Sunni Sect. We would therefore suggest that they adopt that same loyalty when their beloved Imam affirms that Khalid took the wife of Umm Tamim. We would have welcomed the opportunity to know what interpretation of the Deen entitled Khalid to execute a Muslim and sleep with his wife.
Imam Ibn Athir testified as follows in Gharib al-Hadith, Volume 4 page 15:
وكانت جميلة وتزوجها خالد بعد قتله
"She was pretty and Khalid married her after killing him [Malik]"One of the pioneer reliable Sunni historians Ahmad bin Atham (d. 314 H) records in Kitab al-Futuh, Volume 1 page 20:
فيقال إن خالد بن الوليد تزوج بامرأة مالك ودخل بها وعلى ذلك أجمع أهل العلم
It has been said that Khalid married Malik's wife and had sexual intercourse with her and that is what the scholars agreed on.Among the defenders of Khalid & Co. there was a Sunni scholar Hussain bin Muhammad al-Diyarbakri (d. 966 H) who too in his famed book Tarikh Khamees, Volume 2 page 309 testified that after killing Malik bin Nuwayrah, he committed adultery with the widow of Malik, yet Diyar Bakri tired his best to argue Khalid’s case on the basis of mere conjectures, which was indeed an useless attempt. He stated:
فأمر بهم خالد فقتلوا وقتل مالك بن نويرة وتزوج بأمرأته أم تميم من ليلته وكانت جميلة ، قيل لعلها كانت مطلقة قد انقضت عدتها الا انها كانت محبوسة عنده فاشتد في ذلك عمر وقال لأبي بكر ارجم خالدا فانه قد استحل ذلك ، فقال ابوبكر والله لا أفعل ان كان خالد تأول أمرا فأخطأه
"Khalid ordered them to be killed and killed Malik bin Nuwayrah, marrying his wife on the same night and she was pretty. They said, she might have been divorced (by Malik) and her Idda was over but she was imprisoned by him (Malik). Umar was very angry because of that and said to Abu Bakr: ‘Stone Khalid because he made it lawful for himself.’ Abu Bakr said: ‘By Allah I will not do so if Khalid made an error because he did Taweel’.One of the pioneer Sunni scholars in the field of History (Siar alam alnubala, v10, p651) namely Ibn Salam al-Jamhi (d. 232 H) in his book 'Tabaqat al-Fahawal al-Sh'ura' page 27 stated:
غير أن الذي استقر عندنا أن عمر أنكر قتله، وقام على خالد فيه وأغلظ له، وأن أبا بكر صفح عن خالد وقبل تأوله
More Contradictions from Khalid's Defenders:Khalid's Defenders have brought 2 arguments to prove that Khalid bin Waleed was Innocent.
1. First argument is Khalid killed Malik while he became apostate.
But then all traditions proved that Malik was a Muslim and further more Umar and Abu Bakr also confirmed he died as Muslim and paid the blood money. So, the first argument of Sahaba Worshippers become automatically void and then we see that they were running after another argument.
2. So the second argument by them is Khalid didn't kill Malik and his tribesmen, but he took them as prisoners, and then due to Winter Khalid told his people to "Warm the Prisoners". But Khalid's army took wrong meaning of "Warming Prisoners" and instead of bringing fire to make them warm, they misunderstood it and killed all the prisoner.
[Note: This argument of Misunderstanding has been brought by a lot of people like Ibn Kathir in al-Badaya wa al-Nahaya, Volume 6, Incidents of year 11 Hijri]
But problem with this second argument is this that it is clearly a forgery by Khalid's Defenders as if it was misunderstanding to kill Malik and his tribesmen then Question arises why Khalid then jumped over wife of Malik on same night as prisoner?
And Khalid's Defenders have again no answer to this question ..... and they again jump to previous argument that Khalid indeed killed Malik while he became Murtad. So, Khalid's Defenders are playing this flip-flop over these 2 arguments for centuries now. May Allah (swt) give them them the guidance and take them out of their habit of changing the Truth in order to save their Heroic Sahabas. Amin.
Contradiction: How Malik was killed by Khalid
It is also interesting and again Flip Flop by Khalid's Defenders.
1. (According to Ibn Khatheer):
Khalid ordered Zarar to kill Malik and his companions.
Then their HEADS were cut away from their bodies (a pactice which is clearly against Islam)
Then those HEADS were put between stones and put fire upon them and Food was cooked over that fire.
Since this practice was totally against Islam and there was no way to defend the Sahabi Honour of Khalid, therefore a 2nd Story was created, which is as following.
2. Second claim by Sahaba Worshippers is this Malik was killed due to misunderstanding. Khlid only told his army to make Prisoners Warm against cold night by bringing fire to them, but they thought that "Warming Prisoners" mean killing them and thus they slaughtered the prisoners.
Since this is a very stupid story, therefore there are a lot of flaws in it. For example, if Khalid really didn't want to kill Malik as non-Muslim and it was only a misunderstanding, then why Khalid jumped over wife of Malik as prisoner on that same night? Here again Sahaba Worshippers have no answer and again flip to first incident that Malik was indeed a Murtad and he was rightfully slaughtered by Khalid.
May Allah's curse upon the Killers of innocent Muslim and those who defend this satanic act in name of Honour of Sahabi. Amin.
Please For more Details about Khalid bin Walid and his Character & Crimes, read the detailed Article at this LINK
0 comments:
Post a Comment