After 1400 years of Islam, many Muslims feel that Prophet’s Muhammad honor is part of their personal identity, and that any crticism directed at him encroaches on their honor.
First, some review of past events:
Theo van Gogh was murdered by a Dutch Muslim (in 2004), after producing a play that criticized Islam. The Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard who depicted Muhammad was attacked in his home by a Muslim, wielding an axe and a knife (2006), while thousands of Muslims rioted in the streets, protesting the cartoons, burning churches and slaughtering innocent people. Those horrific acts, as well as the Charlie Hebdo massacre (2012) of twelve journalists, at the hands of al-Qaeda operatives, shocked and deeply saddened my left-leaning Western friends. I shared their sadness, but I was certainly not shocked.
Westerners who lived in an Arab country, as I did, have likely seen books and booklets that promote this kind of violence. One is entitled As-Saif al-battar li man sab an nabi al mukhtar (The Sharp Sword for whoever Insults the Chosen Prophet). Another is the widely respected As-Sarum al-maslul ala shatim ar-Rasool (The unsheathed Sword for the insulter of the Apostle). This one in particular is an early work by the 14th century Muslim jurist Ibn Taymiyya, who is considered the most valued religious scholar for Salafi (and Wahhabi) theological interpretation.
I will translate and comment on some key concepts of Ibn Taymiyya’s book. They are directly relevant to how the Salafis’ interpretation influences Muslims to think they are morally required to protect the prophet’s honor. Murder and massacre are not only licit, but praiseworthy.
Ibn Taymiyya writes, “Whoever insults the prophet; whether a Muslim or an infidel must be put to death …” This is the first Muslim consensus among the Sahaba (early companions of Muhammad) and the Taba’een (second generation of followers). All agreed that the person who insults the Prophet must be killed if the insulter is a Muslim.
Ibn Taymiyyah goes on to say, “And the Judge Ayadh (an authority on Islamic jurisprudence) also claimed, ‘The Islamic Umma (nation) has reached consensus that the one who finds fault or insults him (i.e. Muhammad) is to be killed’.”
Ibn Taymiyya lists other esteemed Muslim jurists and theologians who assert that the earliest Muslims agreed that anyone who insults the prophet must be killed. He also cites Ibn Hanbal, one of the four founders of the schools of Jurisprudence in Sunni Islam, who said, “Anyone who insults or belittles the prophet, whether a Muslim or Infidel, must be killed. And any Dhmmi (Jew or Christian) who transgresses the covenant, in speaking in such a manner, is to be killed.
Ibn Taymiyya cites a hadith (narrative) by Muhammad. “There was a blind man who had a concubine through whom he had had two boys who were dear to him, and she was pregnant again. She was an unbeliever and she insulted Muhammad. Her blind husband warned her not to insult his prophet again, but she was not deterred and insulted Muhammad more. Her husband took a knife and ran her though; killing both her and the unborn child. The man reported the story to Muhammad and Muhammad simply said, ‘Bear witness, there is no blood money due for her’.” The Muslim man was not punished or even admonished for murdering his concubine.
Amazingly, this issue is still discussed among Muslims today. Go to an Islamic Q&A website and you will find discussion and even the suggestion that this act, or something very like it, may have happened many times in the history of Islam.
Ibn Taymiyya further presents the opinions of various other jurists and theologians. He indicates distinctions but no real differences, except whether a person who has insulted Muhammad could repent and avoid the death penalty. Some jurists say yes, others say no.
Concerning the Dhimmi (Jew or Christian who pays a poll tax or Jizya) in a Muslim society, Ibn Taymiyya makes it clear. The Dhimmi covenant is that the non-Muslim is subdued and in a state of subservience to the Muslim community. Insulting the prophet is a sign that the Dhimmi does not feel subdued, and therefore must be put to death, even if he claims that he had repented and became a Muslim.
Ibn Taymiyya added that if a Dhimmi insulted Allah’s book [the Quran], his religion [Islam], or the prophet, he/she transgresses the a’hd ad-dhimma (covenant with Muslims) and must be put to death. He wrote, “We must exert ourselves, exchanging our blood and wealth to make the word of Allah the highest.”
In order to prove his point, Ibn Taymiyyah cites the Quran (9:12): “But if they break their oaths after [making] their pact and assail your religion, then fight the leaders of unbelief – verily they have no [binding] oaths, so that they might desist.” To this Ibn Taymiyya says, “Criticism of our religion is a specific and stronger cause to fight them, this is the sunnah [way] of the prophet to fight anyone that harmed Allah or his messenger or anything in the religion.”
Thus, by connecting the matter of insulting Muhammad to an act of aggression against the Dar al-Islam (Islamic nation), ibn Taymiyya provides the theological rationalization for killings like those at Charlie Hebdo.
Note the connection. Ibn Taymiyya asserts that his view is nearly universally agreed upon by the jurists of the four schools of jurisprudence in Sunni Islam. Collaterally, he provides Quranic evidence in support of his view.
He writes extensively in the book about the apostate, the hypocrite, and Jihad. But he does not specifically clarify what to do with the infidel who insults Muhammad, but is outside of the Dar al-Islam (Islamic state). He leaves the impression that insulting Muhammed or Islam, wherever it happens, should be taken as harming Muhammad, Allah, and Muslims. It should be viewed as an act of aggression against Islam. Therefore, Muslims are required to oppose these acts by any means available.
According to a hadith, a Muslim’s faith is measured (by Allah) according to a Muslim’s reaction. It states, “Whosoever of you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand; and if he is not able to do so, then [let him change it] with his tongue; and if he is not able to do so, then with his heart — and that is the weakest of faith.” The Prophet’s words explain that a violent reaction to insulting Muhammad is the highest expression of Islamic faith. Do not be shocked when they are obeyed.
Darrell Pack is an Arabist and a member of Islamic Reform Forum.
PRCS says
You’re knowledgeable and write well, but before I read the entire post:
Their prophet, please. Not Prophet Muhammad.
Thank you.
Wellington says
Seconded, PRCS. Darrel Pack knows a lot, but continuing to refer to the psychopathic, narcissistic, fraudulent, illiterate, brutal and overall 7th-century reprobate as the “Prophet” has to go once and for all.
Still referring to Mohammed as the “Prophet” at least implicitly continues to extend legitimacy to Islam, respecting which it deserves none. Might as well regularly refer to Hitler as “Der Fuhrer.”
Though, continuing this particular train of thought as is now my wont, I sometimes refer to Mohammed as the “Profiteer.” This, I think, is defensible in a mocking way and no one or no thing deserves to be mocked more than Mohammed or Islam.
Language counts. This is the “lesson” here as you aptly noted by your post.
Terry Gain says
I agree wholeheartedly Wellington and I don’t think that any speech regarding Mohammed is impermissible in free and democratic societies.
I see that Darrell Pack is described as an Arabist and member of the Islamic Reform Forum. I take this to mean that he is a Muslim. I appreciate Mr. Pack favouring us with this informative and, quite frankly, frank article concerning Islam, but I do not understand how any person of good faith can write what Mr. Pack has written about Muhammad and Islam and yet remain a Muslim.
Surely a doctrine which mandates the killing of a human being for merely insulting someone, anyone, by itself, demonstrates the illegitimacy of Islam.
Mr. Pack does not indicate what constitutes an insult, but this article reminds me of Barack Obama‘s famous threat to the world before the UN that the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. I took that statement to indicate that Barack Obama is a good Muslim. I am still very disappointed that he received a complete pass for that statement. if I had an opportunity to talk to Barack Obama I would ask him what he meant by slander. Muhammad was objectively evil and I do not know how one can slander such a person.
gravenimage says
Terry, Darrell Pack is *not* a Muslim. An “Arabist” is just someone who has studied the Arab world and its history.
Why would a Muslim write, “We Will Never Live as Dhimmis”?
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/04/we_will_never_live_as_dhimmis_stealth_cultural_jihad_in_america.html
One might describe Robert Spencer as a Arabist, as well.
Quazgaa says
He only lived in muslim countries, he is not muslim.
gravenimage says
Agreed, PRCS, I always refer to the “Prophet” Muhammad using sneer quotes.
James Lincoln says
Yes, gravenimage.
In my posts, I also “disrespect” islam, muslims, prophet mohammed, isis, etc., by using lowercase letters.
gravenimage says
That works too, James. 🙂
mortimer says
The Prophet said, “The head of its matter is Islam and its pillar is the Salah and its highest peak is the Jihad.” – Sunan At-Tirmidhi 2616
Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to At-Tirmidhi
gravenimage says
Yes–murder is the highest expression of Islam.
mortimer says
Response: Jihad includes all activities that promote Islamic supremacism.
– militant/kinetic = Jihad of the sword
– legal/legislative = Jihad of the pen
– propaganda/Islamophobia smear/taqiyya = Jihad of the tongue
– Sharia finance = Jihad of money
Most Muslims conduct the jihad of the tongue by lying about Islam’s supremacist agenda.
Unknown guy says
What about the greater and lesser jihad which one is better?
mortimer says
Dear UG, The ‘lesser jihad’ vs ‘greater jihad’ quotes are all spurious.
The idea of ‘greater’ and ‘lesser’ jihad (with violent jihad being ‘lesser’) comes from an anecdote in an 11th-century history of Baghdad. It is not in the Koran or in any of the authoritative hadith collections.
The earliest documented source of this hadith about ‘greater-lesser’ jihads, is apparently the Ta’rikh Baghdad by the eleventh century Sunni Muslim scholar and historian “Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn `Ali ibn Thabit ibn Ahmad ibn Mahdi al-Shafi`i, commonly known as al-Khatib al-Baghdadi or the lecturer from Baghdad”.
In his work, The History of Baghdad, Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, an 11th-century Islamic scholar, referenced a statement by the companion of Muhammad Jabir ibn Abd-Allah. The reference stated that Jabir said, “The Prophet… returned from one of his battles, and thereupon told us, ‘You have arrived with an excellent arrival, you have come from the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad—the striving of a servant (of Allah) against his desires (holy war).” This reference gave rise to the distinguishing of two forms of jihad: “greater” and “lesser”. Some Islamic scholars dispute the authenticity of this reference and consider the meaning of jihad as a holy war to be more important.
According to the Muslim Jurist Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, the quote in which Muhammad is reported to have said that greater Jihad is the inner struggle, is from an unreliable source:
“This saying is widespread and it is a saying by Ibrahim ibn Ablah according to Nisa’i in al-Kuna. Ghazali mentions it in the Ihya’ and al-`Iraqi said that Bayhaqi related it on the authority of Jabir and said: There is weakness in its chain of transmission.” Hajar al Asqalani, Tasdid al-qaws, see also Kashf al-Khafaa’ (no.1362)
Ibn Taymiyahh (also known as Shaykh ul-Islam to Muslim clerics):
“There is a Hadith related by a group of people which states that the Prophet (p) said after the battle of Tabuk: ‘We have returned from Jihad Asghar [lesser jihad] to Jihad Akbar [greater jihad].’ This hadith HAS NO SOURCE, NOBODY WHOSOEVER in the field of Islamic Knowledge HAS NARRATED IT. Jihad against the disbelievers is the most noble of actions, and moreover it is the most important action for the sake of mankind.”
Unknown guy says
But many muslims say jihad is only done in self defense.
gravenimage says
Unknown guy, Muslims consider just facing Infidels who will not submit to Islam to be “defensive” warfare.
Unknown guy says
What was the final message of Muhammad for all the muslims?
Michael Copeland says
The Prophet of Islam said:
“you will be numerous at that time: but you will be scum and rubbish like that carried down by a torrent, and Allah will take fear of you from the breasts of your enemy and last enervation into your hearts. Someone asked: What is wahn (enervation). Messenger of Allah (ﷺ): He replied: Love of the world and dislike of death.”
https://sunnah.com/abudawud/39/7
gravenimage says
Killing for Muhammad’s Honor: The Highest Expression of the Islamic Faith
………………………
Darrell Pack is spot on here. How many Infidels realize that this is true?
FYI says
What about oblique insults to the “prophet”?
Do they count..?
“The prophet can neither read nor write”
koran 7:157
That was a great novel.Ya know,I’ll bet the “prophet” muhammed couldn’t write like that.
So,Its OK I know how to wire a plug:You know who couldn’t wire a plug?the “prophet” muhammed.
hmm.that was a simple enough Differential Equation:I’ll bet the “prophet” muhammed couldn’t solve it..
Hey! Check out my skateboarding skills Abdool!Why,I’ll bet the “prophet” muhammed couldn’t do this..
The instructions are in Arabic:I can translate..but ..eh..do you know who couldn’t read or translate written Arabic?The “prophet” muhammed..
Wow Laura:you can read THAT and you are only two years old!You know who couldn’t read that… as an ADULT:the “prophet” muhammed…
The “prophet” muhammed?He wouldn’t have been any good at sports..
FYI says
insults …?
The “prophet’s” birthday,is it?Well then…a toast !…say,what’s your poison?
what to get for Aisha and the “prophet” mo’s wedding?Well she’s only 9 years old so i guess a doll and a playhouse would be OK.But…what to get the “perfect” man who has everything he wants?Written Arabic lessons?No,too late….
The funeral of an islamic ‘holy’ man:all dressed up and nowhere nice to go.
There are no mistakes or contradictions in the koran as it is a “perfect” book except for all the mistakes and contradictions in it.
Behead those who insult abstract nouns.
Tony Naim says
Perhaps Mr Pack can serve his readers With greater justice and provide the west a big favor by translating the book of ibn Kayyem Al-Jouziya who is a pupil of Ibn Taymiyya. Al-Jouziyya is the author of “Kitab Ahkam Ahl al-Zoumma” ( book of laws of Dhimmitude).
Dhimmitude in Islam is much more than tax payment. It is a whole set of discriminatory rules and regulations that contain an excessive burden of hardship and prejudice against Christians and Jews in general, NOT only those who live in Islamic societies.
Muslims in the United States view Christians and Jews as Dhimmis, even though they do not admit it in public. Dhimmitude is no different than apartheid.
mortimer says
The dhimmi contract that Muslims feel is their ‘default position’ is the so-called Pact of Omar:
Rules for and Status of Non-Muslim Dhimmis Under Muslim Rule
https://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-kills-pact-of-umar.htm
gravenimage says
Tony, Darrell Pack has indeed written about dhimmitude. See my post above.
tim gallagher says
What a disgraceful ideology Islam is. This vicious, murderous rage all the time. The Muslim response is so different to the Christian response to people who insult or criticise that religion. And, then, there is the unbelievably evil nature of Muhammad by any civilised standards. If he ever existed, which I doubt very much, Muhammad was any incredibly evil low life of a human being. He isn’t a person whose honour is worth defending. He deserves to be insulted (that is, deserves to have the truth told about his vile nature, which is what gets these Muslims to fly off into a rage so often) and Muslims should wake up and recognise that that is the case. They should see that, by even half civilised standards, Muhammad was an appalling creature. He ain’t worth defending, that’s for sure.
The Hittite King says
I aggre with you tim. And I would also like to point out that I really like your comments. You interpret this anti-human ideology called Islam very well. As an ex-Muslim living in Turkey, I know very well what Islam is. And I strongly oppose the idea of equating Islam with Christianity. I’m not a Christian myself. But I’m reading the Bible right now, and when I’m done reading it, I’ll decide whether I should be a Christian or not. But from what I have seen and read, I can say that I prefer Christianity to Islam a thousand times ! Jesus Christ commands us to pray even for our enemies. However, Muhammad’s sadistic allah wants to be mistreated against the infidels and teaches that Muslims are superior. Sadistic allah wants unbelievers in eternal hell… I think calling Islam a religion would be an insult to Christianity and other religions.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for your comment, The Hittite King. I like the comments of many of the people who comment here at Jihad Watch. I am amazed at the extraordinary level of knowledge about Islam that Mortimer displays. There are many other commenters here who have a knowledge of Islam that is way beyond mine. I’m probably a bit too lazy to look deeply into things.But I do believe very strongly that Islam is a vicious and barbaric ideology in so many ways. I guess there have been other very violent and evil religions that have existed during mankind’s history, such as, say, the old Aztec religion, but islam seems to me to be the worst that still exists. I am a Christian, not a very good one, but I do think that the outlook that a person gets in Christianity is pretty much the opposite to the outlook people receive from Islam, such as the idea of hating, and even killing non-Muslims that is there in Islam. Christianity has the Golden Rule about treating other people as you would want them to treat you, etc. It has some noble ideals to strive for. Buddhism also seems to me to give people a fairly tolerant attitude towards other people. Maybe there is no God and no afterlife, but I certainly do get some comfort from the idea of a loving type of Christian God. Good luck with whatever decision you come to about Christianity. I agree with what you say about allah being sadistic. And Muhammad, if he existed, was a nasty human being. Do you get into any trouble with the people around you for being an ex-Muslim in Turkey or are people OK with it?
The Hittite King says
Thank you for wishing me luck, Tim. I hide from people that I’m an ex-Muslim. According to the law in Turkey, it is not a crime to abandon Islam. But openly criticizing Islam could lead to me going to jail. In addition, I am concealing my ex-Muslim identity by considering the reaction I may receive from my relatives. For example, my uncle threatened me with death when he found out that I had stopped praying five times a day. As in most Islamic countries, Muslims in Turkey have a bias towards non-Muslims. So I want to live in a country where people can respect my opinion. But if I can’t emigrate to a country where there is freedom, I will have to learn to live with people who are prejudiced.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for that information, The Hittite King. I thought there might be a problem with leaving islam in Turkey, even though it is not as hardline as some other Muslim countries. Your uncle, who threatened you with death, sounds like a very nasty person, although I guess, in Islam, that is considered to be good and appropriate behaviour from Muslims. Again, it is so totally different from the way people behave in western, Christian societies. Here in Australia, if a Christian said, well, I don’t believe in the Christian God anymore, (such as many people in my own family and amongst friends of mine) I don’t think most people would be too bothered. Having faith or losing it would be seen as a deeply personal decision. Faith might come and go, but it certainly isn’t something that involves threatening to harm or kill people. Anyway, stay safe and good luck. It is certainly a hard and unpleasant life in Muslim countries for people who want to leave Islam behind. Islam is a thuggish and bullying religion, that’s for sure.
gravenimage says
Fine exchange, Tim and The Hittite King.
The Hittite King, you are a brave man for having left Islam.
The Hittite King says
Thank you again, Tim. As long as I hide that I am Ex-muslim, I will be safe in Turkey.
Thank you for your kind words, Gravenimage. In fact, I owe it to some ex-muslim Turks and a Wahhabi Imam to get rid of Islam. I think you’ve heard about Wahhabism. I think Wahhabism represents true Islam. According to that Wahhabi Imam,painting, music and sculpture are haram. That Wahhabi Imam is fiercely opposed to democracy and secularism. Even for Islamist parties, he considers those who voted in the elections to be heretics. As a person who loves art,painting and music, I began to loathe Islam thanks to that Wahhabi imam. I had decided that Islam was no longer a proper religion for me. But it has not been easy to abandon the religion that my family is also a member of and that I have lived in since I was born. I spent nine months researching Islam, but I was afraid to leave Islam because I thought Allah would punish me. Finally, I contacted some ex-muslim Turks on the internet and with their help I left Islam. I felt empty for a week. But then I got used to it and I don’t think about going back to Islam anymore. I consider myself lucky to have left Islam. Because now I can take care of art freely without fear of Allah. This is my story.
tim gallagher says
Thanks for the story of how you came to leave Islam behind, The Hittite King. It is interesting how you say you researched Islam for nine months. I had no idea about Islam and I began to notice a lot of trouble from Muslim here in Australia back in the 1990’s. Imams saying disgusting stuff about our western way of life, rape gangs, would be terrorists, very violent Muslim criminals, etc, so that is why I began to do a bit of research and I found a lot of very nasty, hate-filled content in Islam. Since then, I have just thought that there is no way that we can get along with Islam. There is a complete incompatibility between Islam’s view of life and our view of life. Then I started to write to politicians to try to wake them up, because I felt that most of them didn’t know anything about Islam’s nature. I don’t think I achieved much, but maybe a few of the politicians did wake up a bit. Anyway, I hope you remain safe and enjoy life as much as is possible for a non-Muslim in Turkey. Good luck with your art. I hope you do well with that creative endeavour. What you say about hardline Islam, Wahhabism, forbidding music and other art forms is sickening. Hardline Islam seems totally inhuman. So much of what is human is forbidden. It is a really sick religion.
gravenimage says
Thanks for your account, The Hittite King.
I also love art. I have degrees in art and art history, and am an illustrator and designer. One of the things I hate most about Islam after its abuse and murder of people is its hatred of art.
Anjuli Pandavar says
This is a great eye-opener for me. I’ve not studied Ibn Taymiyya. Thank you. I would like to make two contributions:
The supposedly most-decent “scholar” Yasir Qadhi never tires of telling the world that his most valued religious teacher is that self-same Ibn Taymiyya.
“By connecting the matter of insulting Muhammad to an act of aggression against the Dar al-Islam (Islamic nation), ibn Taymiyya provides the theological rationalization for killings like those at Charlie Hebdo.” Certainly this is true. It would be worth keeping in mind that Muslims are motivated by more than rationalisation. I would suggest that rationalisation is not the initial motivation, but a vengeful impulse in response to a *personal* sense of having been slighted or insulted. The idea that Allah/Muhammad is closer to the Muslim than his own jugular vein, again often referred to by Qadhi, has real substance. The violent reactions do not require rationalistion, but invoke rationalisation when required.
Rooster says
I’m not a friend to Islam, obviously, and I would simply take care of Islam the same way Israel took care of Jericho and all the enemies of the God of Abraham. However, I would finish the task and not leave a remnant like Israel has in the past. There is a reason why the phrase “War is Hell” is relevant. Either Jew and Christian survive or Islam survives, but for sure it will take the complete extermination of one or the other. So sad that reconciliation is not an option.
gravenimage says
Keeping Islam isolated has worked before.
Civilus Defendus says
Murderously Imperial. Oppressively Colonial. Violently Intolerant. Not multicultural. (And very poor environmental stewards, too.) So, why do so few call them out as such? Because they threaten harm or actually may kill you? So much easier to disrespect Europe and America, than hold ‘slam accountable.