By Afaque Siddiqui, New Age Islam
(Translated from Urdu by Arman Neyazi, New Age Islam)
15th October, 2012
Sam Bacile the man behind the film has tried to prove that Prophet (pbuh) was not a prophet of God. He does that by maliciously highlighting one particular trait of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)’s life through his actors, that is, he used to talk of ‘revelations’ just to justify his deeds of his fulfilment of sexual desires. And thus he used to be successful in silencing his critics.
Jews and Christians, even today, do not accept Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as prophet of God. They keep proving their claim by quoting Islamic books, Ahadith and Quranic Ayahs. Their speeches and writ-ups get more authentic as one finds no incident in Hazrat Isa (as)’s life which describes his sexual appetite or of coming under its influence. There is no such description of any other prophets of Quran or Bible. One such incident occurred in the life of Hazrat Yusuf (as) in which he was proven innocent and Zulekha’s character was maligned. There is one incident in the life of Hazrat Musa (as) where he is described to be alone with young daughters of Hazrat Shoaib (as). It is said that when the girls saw him, they fell in love with him. The girls talked to their father about their fondness for him and Hazrat Shoaib married one of his daughters with Hazrat Musa (as). In this incident also Hazrat Musa (as)’s character, like that of Hazrat Yusuf (as) has been shown pious and holy.
In this background when Christians and Jews study Hazrat Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)’s life, they do not get those high moral characteristics in him that they get in other prophets. And the second most important point is Prophet (pbuh)’s declaring the killings of Christians and Jews legal for the growth of Islam.
The Christians and Jews who did not accept Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as God’s true prophet and his Book, the last Book, were forced to leave their country. Their wealth and property used to be seized, declared as booty and distributed among Prophet (pbuh)’s companions. This way of governance continued till the end of Muslim rule all over Asia, Africa and Spain. The rise of this way of governance started dwindling in the beginning of 16th century itself. Muslim migration from Spain started. The age of renaissance in Europe had started. Economic and political transformations had begun. Europeans had started exhibiting their might in the western and eastern seas. Since then, Muslim ummah have not achieved anything worthwhile which can help them re-establish their lost glorious rule.
The development in Christian’s wealth and glory which started at that point of time is still on the rise. This has provided them with an opportunity of bringing their hatred for Islam back into focus, in front of the Muslims and the world, in a scholarly way. Now they are not afraid of their misdeeds being e a reason for their destruction and fall.
Christian scholars started their critical study of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the Holy Quran in the beginning of 17th century after which they started publishing ‘hate books’. First of all they tried to prove that Quran is nothing but an extension of the incidents and stories of Bible and Torah and if there is any addition in it, it is the character of Prophet Muhammad (saw). Secondly, they concentrated on proving Prophet (pbuh)’s character un-prophetic, taking references from the books of Islamic Ulema and Muhaddeseen.
The books written by Muslim historians and Muhaddeseen, which were somehow saved from being destroyed, were translated in German, French, Spanish and Latin languages. Then these books were translated in English which provided the Christian world with an opportunity to study them. The representatives of Churches took admission in the most prestigious Al Azhar University (Cairo) to achieve their objective of learning Arabic. This provided them first hand opportunity of studying Islamic history, Quran and Hadees. They did not need the translated books anymore and were able to translate them, themselves.
Their translated books, based on their wisdom and logic, were most favoured in the anti- Islamic world and became a source of spiritual pain and anguish for the true and emotional Muslims and for some believers these books started becoming a source of shame and embarrassment.
No Muslim can do character assassination of Hazrat Musa (as or Hazrat Isa (as) to bring shame on Christians and Jews as Quran has always spoken highly about them and declares that Muslims have no right to distinguish among the Prophets of God. Contrary to this Christians and Jews declare their Prophets and their Books to be the last. They neither accept the Holy Quran, Allah’s book nor Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) Allah’s last Prophet. Christians and Jews, joining hands on the intellectual platform, for the last one hundred years, are busy to prove their point.
The First and the Second World Wars were fought to establish sectarian and political superiority among the nations. Almost three hundred thousand people lost their lives and almost four times of it were injured or lost their families. These two wars were cause of destruction of innumerable Islamic historical books. Neither any Angel was sent nor was any Divine wrath descended on the perpetuator of this heinous crime. American and English armies were victorious in both these wars. Their God, perhaps, helped them. Hitler and his companions’ God tasted defeat. Leaders like Hitler, Mussolini and Subhash Chandra Bose met their fate. Japan was alive but without its limbs. These wars were fought on the political differences hence all the foes turned into friends, after compromises. Had these wars been fought for religious reasons, they would still have been enemies.
Differences between Muslims and Jews are purely religious and according to their faiths it has to remain as it is, till the Day of Judgement.
Arab Muslims have innumerable stories in their madrasa syllabus which will keep hatred against the Jews, alive. Muslim kids of these madrasas take abusing Jews, as their religious duty. Asking for God’s curse on Christians and Jews in every Khutbah of Friday payer is taken as an Islamic duty. Christians were treading the same path before the Second World War but after the establishment of the state of Israel, lessons of hatred for Jews were slowly taken off the Christian syllabus.
Hollywood produced a film “Ben Hur” in 1958 to end two thousand years old hatred against the Jews. The film shows Hazrat Isa Maseeh (as) being kind to a Jew, Ben Hur. When the Jew, a captive, was flogged on the order of the ruler of the time and was kept thirsty, Hazrat Maseeh (as) himself took water to him and quenched his thirst. None else but the Jew could see him. The Jew’s mother and sister who were a captive of Roman Empire and were suffering from leprosy were cured by Jesus Christ. Impressed with his kindness, Ben Hur, his mother and sister converted to Christianity. This movie influenced Christians a lot. Their hatred for Jews started turning into sympathy. Christian missionaries who had refused to help in the establishment of Israeli state agreed to assist, influenced by this movie.
Hazrat Masih (as) in his 32/33 years of life never had to participate in any kind of war. There is nothing offensive about his character hence no one ever can be offended through his characterisation in any film or any form of literature. Contrary to this if Muslims ever tried to produce a film highlighting Prophet (pbuh)’s or his Companions Sira, Europe or America will certainly produce another film to diminish the good impression created.
We all know, Islamic history is full of wars and beheadings. In this case, what will be the basis of our proving Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) being “Rahmatul Lil Aalameen”?
Let us now come to the hate mongering film “Innocence of Muslims” because of which Muslims all over the world caused their own death and destruction of their cities. Perhaps, this is what Islam haters were expecting from the Muslims. And the Muslims fulfilled their wish to the best of their might. Let us have a look on the realities of the scenes enacted in this film.
(1) Quran’s dictate against the adoption of a son
(2) Zainab’s divorce from Zayd bin Haarisa
(3) Prophet (pbuh)’s marriage with Zainab (ra)
(4)Prophet (pbuh)’s exclusive relationship with Maria Qubtia. Rejection of the turns of meeting the wives which was formed for the sake of justice and then Muhammad (pbuh)’s following it for one month.
(5) Marriage with Aisha Siddiqua (ra) when she was 9 years old.
(6) Killing of Bannu Quariza tribe, murder of octogenarian woman tribal leader and Islamic Mujahideen’s eye on the young daughter of the tribe’s leader.
(7) And all these happened in front of the eyes of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) whose Quranic title is “Rahmatul Lil Aalameen”
Prophet (saw) had married his aunt’s daughter Hazrat Zainab with Zaid bin Haarsa, his adopted son. This marriage was solemnised to make it an example of social and political equality. Zaid bin Haarsaa’s father was an Arab but a slave. Hazrat Khadija (ra) had entrusted Zaid to the Prophet (saw). He had adopted him as a son. To end the custom of sectarianism among Arabs Prophet (pbuh) had to set an example which he did.
The marriage reached its natural end. Hazrat Zainab (ra) was a beautiful lady of Quraish tribe. The only attraction she could have had towards a black Arab was that of him being an adopted son of Prophet (saw). No sexual attraction from the side of Zainab (ra) could have been expected. Wish of Prophet (saw) was taken as a wish of God; so not accepting the wish was equal to rebellion against God. Hence when Hazrat Zainab (ra) and her family had problems in accepting this advice, Qur’anic Ayaah no.36 of Surah Ahzab was revealed which dictated that, “It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should [thereafter] have any choice about their affair. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly strayed into clear error.”
After this Ayah No. 37 was revealed, in which Allah Kareem says, “And [remember, O Muhammad], when you said to the one on whom Allah bestowed favour and you bestowed favour, "Keep your wife and fear Allah," while you concealed within yourself that which Allah is to disclose. And you feared the people, while Allah has more right that you fear Him. So when Zaid had no longer any need for her, We married her to you in order that there not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sons when they no longer have need of them. And ever is the command of Allah accomplished.”
In this Ayah Allah Kareem says to His Prophet (saw) that you had concealed the thing in your heart which Allah was to disclose and that you were afraid of people.
Allama Mohammad Junagarhi has thus explained this matter of “concealing” and disclosing”: God had informed Prophet (pbuh) through prophecy as well, that .... “Zaid will certainly divorce and after that your marriage will be solemnised with Zainab, so that this rite of ‘adopted son’ in Sharia is not like ‘own son’ is maintained and that marriage with his divorcee is just. This is what this Ayah deals with. “Concealing the matter in heart” deals with the “wish of marrying Hazrat Zainab (ra)”. Prophet (pbuh) was afraid what people will say, Prophet (pbuh) married his own daughter-in-law. There was no need to be afraid of people when God wanted this system to be abolished through Prophet (pbuh). “Disclosing the matter” means to bring this rite in front of the people by solemnising Nikah with self. This Nikah was solemnised with the order of the God, without recitation of Nikah, fixation of Meher and witnesses unlike the popular system. This fact cannot be denied that in this very Surah God had already revealed that ‘adopted son is not a real son’. The revelation of this Surah was not concerned only with Zaid, rather it was an order for the whole of Arab Muslims. This Surah transformed Zaid bin Muhammad into Zaid bin Haarsa and the Prophet (pbuh) himself announced that now nobody will call Zaid, Zaid bin Muhammad, any more.
The fact, book of Sira has it mentioned at various places that Prophet (pbuh) loved Zainab (ra) and he wanted Zaid to divorce so that he could marry her. Allah says, ‘He knew what will be the result of Zaid and Zainab’s marriage’. And Allah knew the attraction Prophet (pbuh) had for Zainab and was concealing it. In this scenario Zaid divorced Zainab (ra) and after the completion of Iddat God, the Almighty married His beloved Prophet (pbuh) with Zainab (ra) hence meher or witnesses were not needed. Zainab (ra) also did not know all this. The critics say that, “a woman cannot be married without her wishes, according to Sharia laws and if it has been solemnised it will become false.” They also say that “in social customs if a prophet or a messenger wishes to fulfil his desires, he can very easily say his followers that whatever he does, God knows and whatever he does is according to God’s wish. This peculiar situation prevents a prophet either being a guide to the people or being ‘a favoured one of God’. Prophets and messengers are taken as a follower of God’s order as His people. “
The shot of the film “Innocence of Muslims” shows Zainab (ra) surprised when Prophet (pbuh) touches her as a Mahram as she was not married to him. Prophet (pbuh) says her that God has solemnised their marriage on “Arsh” hence she is married to him and that he is her husband as per the orders of the God. On watching such a scene, Muslims being ashamed and then getting furious will be called a natural reaction. But when a Muslim or non-Muslim recites the concerned Ayah and Ahadith and its references in Quran without being respectful to God and His prophets, a lack of knowledge and intellectual honesty comes to the fore.
I have Allama Mohammad Junagadhi’s analysis and references with me which have been distributed among the Urdu knowing Muslims of the world by the Saudi Arabian government and its Head Shah Fahad bin Abdul Aziz al Saud. The said references and analyses were examined through various tests and scholarly researches. My citations have been taken from this very translation and references.
The said film does not show any good deeds or acts of Prophet (pbuh) but only the episodes that show him in bad light.
After the scene of Hazrat Zainab (ra)’s marriage it shows the meeting with Hazrat Maria Qubtiya in Hazrat Hafsa’s tent. This scene also is taken from the references of the Holy Quran. In the very beginning of Surah At-Tahreem, God says, “O Prophet, why do you prohibit [yourself from] what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives?”
In his analysis of this Ayah, Allama Junagadhi writes, Sanan Nesaai describes that, there was a concubine whom Prophet (pbuh) had made haram for himself. There are ulema who describe this Hadis as ‘Zaeef’ (weak Hadis) whereas Shaikh Naasiruddin Albani, a great researcher of Hadis, declares it to be right Hadis (Proven Hadis). Once she had come to Hazrat Hafsa’s house when she was not at home. In the meantime Hazrat Hafsa came and saw Prophet (pbuh) with her in privacy. She did not like this. Prophet (pbuh) also felt this and to please Hazrat Hafsa he made Maria haram for himself and asked Maria not to tell this to anyone. But when Hazrat Hafsa made this episode public Prophet (pbuh) did not like it. Through fifth Ayah of Surah Tahreem, God expresses His anger on Hazrat Aisha (ra) and Hafsa, who had expressed their dislike of Prophet’s closeness with Maria without turn, and says if Prophet (pbuh) divorces them for this act of theirs, God will provide him with better wives, unmarried or divorcees, who will be among the better believers and of piety. And they were asked to ask God’s forgiveness, which will be better. And in the next Ayah they were warned of the punishment of Hell.
It will be quite unreasonable to think that Christian and Jewish scholars and researchers will study Quran and Hadis with the true devotion of a true Muslim and will write to help the growth of Islam. The hermeneutists who are Muslims and whose mother tongue is Arabic will never explain anything in a manner which shows, God, the Holy Quran or Prophet (pbuh) in bad taste. If they, the writers, take themselves to be secular, they are free to be independent of the real taste of faith and do not exert to make their descriptions pleasant. But whatever they say should be based on wise reasoning and historical facts. Such writings do affect the faithfuls. All the religions are based on the personal emotions towards its guides.
After this the producers of the film, by showing the killing of Umm Qirfa, wish to show as to how brutally Muslims used to behave with their enemies and how much they used to be sexually aroused if they got hold of a young and beautiful woman. The tribe of Umm Qirfa whose real name was Fatima bint Rabia and was the leader of Banu Qurayza, had inflicted loss to a Muslim delegation. They had injured Zaid bin Haaris who was the leader of the delegation. The delegation returned to Madina. Zaid bin Haaris got well and then Prophet (pbuh) sent a group of armed Mujahideen to avenge the incident. Muslims got victorious. All men of the tribe, who were, some say, 900 in number, were beheaded. Both the legs of Umm Qirfa, an octogenarian woman, were tied to the legs of two camels and the camels were driven in opposite directions until her body rent into two parts. After that she was beheaded and her head was presented as a victory sign to Prophet (pbuh). Some people have written that her head was ordered to be taken in a procession in Madina for the people to take lesson. Muslims massacred the entire tribe of Banu Qurayza in their revenge; this is proved by the study of all historians.
and Safiur Rahman Mubarakpuri, whose book ‘Al Raheeq-ul-Makhtoom’ was given first prize by the Saudi government, all have descriptions of this incident according to their knowledge and wisdom in the light of faith. In the revenge attack on the enemy no army has ever shown great character nor can it ever do this. War, whether it is political or religious, is a war because the army is able to achieve victory only when it shows its inhuman face. Hence it will be shocking if one is watching the scene of Umm Qirfa’s killing on his dining table with delicious food and half a dozen servants in attendance. And thus we can very easily understand the feelings for the killers and killed.
Now, what is to be considered is, as to whom we are inflicting damage, falling prey to a well knit conspiracy and who in fact is tasting defeat.
I am praying to God to give Muslims the sense to understand what is good for them and what is bad.
Dr Afaq Siddiqui is M. A. in English Literature from AMU. He has been a teacher in AMU, Kashmir University and Jamia Millia Islamia. He has served as a Senior Education Officer in Nigeria for eight years. He has also travelled many times to Europe, America and Pakistan.
URL for Urdu Article: