Friday Sermon
24 January 2025
Muhammadsa: The Great Exemplar
After reciting the tashahhud, ta‘awwuz, and Surah al-Fatihah, Hazrat Khalifatul Masih Vaa stated:
Expeditions from the time of the Holy Prophetsa are being discussed. In this context, the first expedition I am going to mention today is the Expedition of Kurz bin Jabir. This expedition took place in Shawwal in the sixth year after Hijra, heading towards the people of ‘Uraniyyin. (Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra, Vol. 2, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 71)
Some believe that this was the Expedition of Sa’eed bin Zaid. However, the majority have said that this was the Expedition of Kurz bin Jabir. One tradition states that this was the Expedition of Jarir bin ‘Abdullah. However, this tradition has been rebutted as well. Jarir bin ‘Abdullah accepted Islam four years after this expedition. (Al-Sirah Al-Halabiyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 260)
The cause of this expedition was that some individuals came to the Holy Prophetsa. In Bukhari, under the Book of Jihad and the Book of Diyat [blood money], it is related by Hazrat Anasra that these eight individuals belonged to the tribes of ‘Ukl and ‘Urainah. According to Ibn Jarir and Abu ‘Awana, four belonged to ‘Urainah and three belonged to ‘Ukl, whereas the eighth did not belong to either of the tribes; his family background is unknown. They came to the Holy Prophetsa and conversed about Islam. In another narration, it is recorded that they accepted Islam and were all ill at the time. Abu ‘Awana has related that they were very weak, rather yellow in complexion and that their stomachs had become expanded. They said, “O Messengersa of Allah! Grant us protection and give us food.” As such, they were accommodated in an enclosure of Masjid Nawabi. When they recovered, the climate of Medina did not suit their body. That is, they recovered from their ailments and fatigue due to their thirst and hunger. However, in general terms, the climate of Medina did not suit them. According to Ibn Ishaq, they did not find the climate [of Medina] to be suitable and became weak. Although they recovered from one aspect, since their weakness was related to hunger, they fell ill due to other ailments. In any case, in one tradition it is stated that at that time, an illness broke out in Medina, known as Birsam. Birsam is an illness, which affects the brain and causes swelling on the head and the chest. They said, “This disease has already reached here and the climate of Medina does not suit us. We are livestock owners, not farmers. Kindly provide us with milk.” Upon this, the Holy Prophetsa said that he did not have anything else. However, they could go to the she-camels and thus he sent them to the pasture. In one narration, it is recorded that the Holy Prophetsa sent them to [the pasture of] Faifa-ul-Khabar. Faifa-ul-Khabar is a barren area near Medina.
In any case, from this narration, it appears that they did not stay long in Medina, but left rather quickly and their health improved after drinking the milk of the she-camels. In another narration, it is recorded that the Holy Prophetsa permitted them to go to the camels that had been allocated for charity so that they may drink their milk. As such, they went to these camels and drank their milk. When they recovered and their bodies returned to their normal state and their stomachs reduced in size, they reverted from Islam and drove those she-camels away. On one hand, we have the kind treatment of the Holy Prophetsa and on the other side, we have their behaviour of recovering and then being deceitful. It is related that the freed slave of the Holy Prophetsa, Yassar, and some of his comrades found them. This group of individuals had driven these she-camels away after reverting [from Islam] and took these camels with them. In any case, the Muslims challenged them and they fought them head-on. The [disbelievers] also fought them back. They severed the hands and feet of Yassar and pierced thorns into his tongue and eyes until he died. These people who had come and stolen the she-camels, they fought the Muslim keepers as well and killed them. They then turned to the shepherd and first killed Yassar and then killed the other shepherds as well. One individual came to the Holy Prophetsa and said, “They have killed my comrades!” One of them survived. He came to the Holy Prophetsa and said that they had taken the she-camels.
It is narrated by Muhammad bin Umar that a woman from the Banu Amr bin Awf, riding her donkey, came to a certain place and passed by Yassar, who was lying under a tree. When she passed by him, he had already passed away. She returned to her people and informed them about the incident. Thus, her people also came, and they carried Yassar’s body and brought him towards Quba.
There is a narration in Sahih Muslim, that some young men from the Ansar were present with the Holy Prophetsa, and he sent them. In one narration, it is mentioned that the Holy Prophetsa sent twenty horsemen to follow their tracks, meaning that after they had left and the news reached him, he sent people behind them to apprehend them.
Some of their names have also been recorded, including Salma bin Akwa’, Abu Ruham, Abu Dharr Ghiffari, Buraida bin Husaib, Rafi bin Maqees, his brother Jundub, Bilal bin Harith, Abdullah bin Amr bin Awf Muzani, Juwal bin Suraqa Salbi, and Suwaid bin Sakhr Juhni. All of these individuals were from among the Muhajireen, and the Holy Prophetsa appointed Kurzan bin Jabir Fihri as their leader.
The Holy Prophetsa sent them to pursue the enemy and also sent a tracker with them to follow their footprints. The Holy Prophetsa prayed against the enemies, saying: “O Allah, cause them hindrance in their path and make it even restricted for them than the hide of a camel,” meaning that they should not be able to travel further. Allah the Almighty caused them to lose their way, and they were caught the same day. When the day rose, they were brought before the Holy Prophetsa. These 20 individuals captured them and brought them to him.
In one narration, it is mentioned that Kurz bin Jabir and his companions searched for them until nightfall; thus, they spent the night in Harra. Then morning came, but they did not know where the enemy had gone. Suddenly, they saw a woman carrying shoulder meat of a camel. They captured her and asked, “What is this?” The woman replied, “I passed by a people who had slaughtered a camel, and they gave me this shoulder. They are in this wilderness.” They also gave her a piece of meat from the upper part of the leg, i.e., the thigh. She said, “When you see them, you will notice smoke.” Smoke will be rising from where they are seated.
The Companions departed and reached the group after they had finished eating. The Companions asked for their surrender. All of them were captured, and not one of them escaped. The Companions tied them up, placed them on their horses behind them, and brought them to Medina. The Holy Prophetsa was at a place called Righaba; this was adjacent to Jurf, which is located three miles from Medina.
Nonetheless, they took the captured men to the Holy Prophetsa. Hazrat Anasra narrates that he, along with some boys, followed them until they reached the Holy Prophetsa at a place where water flowed in the valley of Righaba. Thus, the Holy Prophetsa then ordered that iron rods be brought. They were heated. The Holy Prophetsa passed these heated rods over their eyes because they had inflicted the same cruelty upon the Muslim shepherds. According to one narration, when they were brought before the Holy Prophetsa, he ordered that one of their hands and the opposite foot be cut off, and their eyes be cauterised with the heated rods. They were left in the scorching sun until they perished.
Another narration mentions that heated rods were passed over their eyes, and they were left in the sun. They would ask for water, but they were not given any. Hazrat Anasra states that “I saw one of them licking the ground with his tongue due to extreme thirst, and also due to the heat so that he could be cooled, until they all died. Their wounds were not treated to stop the bleeding, nor were they given any medical treatment.
Abu Qilaba narrates that these were the individuals who committed murder, theft, and apostatised after accepting Islam, and they waged war against Allah and His Messengersa. Ibn Sireen mentions that this incident of the ‘Uraniyyin occurred before the revelation of the ruling regarding Islamic punishments. This entire incident took place in this manner. It appears on the surface as if the Muslims committed great cruelty. However, the Islamic injunctions were revealed later, which clarified the prescribed rulings about punishment. Allah the Almighty revealed the verse:
اِنَّمَا جَزٰٓؤُا الَّذِیۡنَ یُحَارِبُوۡنَ اللّٰہَ وَرَسُوۡلَہٗ وَیَسۡعَوۡنَ فِی الۡاَرۡضِ فَسَادًا اَنۡ یُّقَتَّلُوۡۤا اَوۡ یُصَلَّبُوۡۤا اَوۡ تُقَطَّعَ اَیۡدِیۡہِمۡ وَاَرۡجُلُہُمۡ مِّنۡ خِلَافٍ اَوۡ یُنۡفَوۡا مِنَ الۡاَرۡضِ ؕ ذٰلِکَ لَہُمۡ خِزۡیٌ فِی الدُّنۡیَا وَلَہُمۡ فِی الۡاٰخِرَۃِ عَذَابٌ عَظِیۡمٌ
“The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to create disorder in the land is only this that they be slain, or crucified, or their hands and their feet be cut off on alternate sides, or they be expelled from the land. That is a disgrace for them in this world, and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.” (Surah al-Ma’idah, 5:34)
After this verse, the Holy Prophetsa did not cauterise anyone’s eyes, nor did he cut anyone’s tongues, nor gave a severer punishment than cutting off their arms and legs. And after this, he forbade mutilation to whatever army he would send. And after this, the Holy Prophetsa encouraged charity, and forbade mutilation. Muhammad bin Umar, Waqidi, and Ibn Sa’d narrate that they had stolen fifteen camels from the fields. (Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 6, p. 122, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 115-117; Sahih Muslim, Kitab-ul-Qasama wa Al-Muharabin, Hadith: 3150, Vol. 9, Noor Foundation, p. 13; Mu’jam-ul-Buldan, Dr Ghulam Jilani Barq, p. 263; Furhang-e-Sirat, Zawar Academy, p. 87)
Nonetheless, this was the manner in which treated the Muslims, so the punishment given to them was equivalent to their actions. However, afterwards, in accordance with the Islamic law, such treatment was never repeated.
Though this is the answer [to the allegation], but a detailed response, and to some of the allegations of some of the critics who question why such a cruel punishment was given. Hazrat Mirza Bashir Ahmad Sahibra has given an excellent answer to this in Sirat Khatam-un-Nabiyyeen. He writes:
“These were very threatening days for the Muslims, because the whole land was ablaze with the fire of animosity, inflamed by the Quraish and the Jews. Moreover, according to their new policy, they had decided that instead of systematically attacking Medina, it should be harmed by secret methods. Furthermore, since deceit and treachery were inherent in the uncivilised tribes of Arabia, they were adamant in hurting the Muslims by any means possible. As such, the incident we are about to mention is but a link in this very nefarious chain of events, which came to an end in a terrible manner. The details are that in Shawwal 6 AH., a few men which were eight in number, from the tribes of ‘Ukl and ‘Urainah, came to Medina, and after expressing their love and affection towards Islam became Muslim. After a stay of some time, the climate of Medina affected their spleens and they suffered from a stomach virus. Using this as an excuse, they presented themselves before the Holy Prophetsa. They presented their illness and said, ‘O Messengersa of Allah! We are Bedouin people and have spent our time living with animals. We are not accustomed to the city life and therefore, we have fallen ill.’ The Holy Prophetsa responded, ‘If you feel ill in Medina, then go out of Medina and stay in the inhabitation of our cattle (He fulfilled the duty of hospitality and treated them with kindness.) and drink the milk of camels, etc., You shall become well (by living there).’ In another narration, it is recorded that they themselves requested, “O Messengersa of Allah! If you permit us we would like to go outside of Medina where your cattle are situated,” and the Holy Prophetsa permitted them to do so. In any case, they sought permission of the Holy Prophetsa and went to live in the pasture, which was inhabited by the camels of the Muslims.
“When these wretched people had set up camp and fully ascertained the state of affairs, and had recovered their health after living in the open climate and drinking the milk of camels, they suddenly attacked the shepherds of these camels one day and killed them. Moreover, in doing so, they were so cruel that first they slaughtered them like animals, and when there was still some life left in them, they pierced their tongues with sharp desert thorns so that when they made a sound or tossed and turned in the agony of thirst, these thorns would add to their suffering. Then, these barbarians did not suffice at this, but took hot iron rods and rubbed them into the eyes of the half-dead Muslims. In this manner, the innocent Muslims died tossing and turning in an open field. Among them was a personal servant of the Holy Prophetsa named Yassar, who was appointed to graze the camels of the Holy Prophetsa.
“When these savages had killed the Muslims in this barbaric manner, they gathered all the camels and took them away. These events were reported to the Holy Prophetsa by a shepherd who happened to escape to safety. The Holy Prophetsa immediately prepared a party of twenty Companions and sent them in pursuit. Although these people had already covered some ground, by God’s grace, the Muslims swiftly pursued them and managed to capture them. The Muslims tied them in ropes and brought them back. Until that time, no injunctions had been revealed to the Holy Prophetsa as to what should be done with an individual who commits such actions. Therefore, as per his old practice that until a new injunction was revealed in Islam, the way of the people of the book was followed according to Mosaic law, the Holy Prophetsa ordered that just as these cruel people had treated the Muslim shepherds, they too should be treated in retribution and in equal retaliation. (This was the teaching of Mosesas and this was acted upon until a new injunction was revealed.) In any case, this was done to serve as a lesson to others. Thus, almost in the same manner, these people were lowered into the pit of death in an open field outside Medina. However, God had decreed a different law for Islam, and so from thereon, even in a state of retribution and equal retaliation, the punishment of mutilation was forbidden. In other words, it was prohibited that the body of a criminal be disfigured in any way, or for body parts to be cut into pieces in a manner of retribution, etc.”
Hazrat Mirza Bashir Ahmad Sahibra further writes about this incident:
“We need not write extensively on this account, because the cruelty was instigated by the infidels towards the Muslims in this savage and barbaric manner without any just cause, purely out of animosity for Islam. Furthermore, whatever was done to them in punishment, was merely in retribution and equitable retaliation. Moreover, it was done in such a state when the entire land was ablaze with a fire of enmity towards Islam. Then, this decision was also in accordance with the Mosaic Law but even then, Islam did not uphold this law, and prohibited such a course of action in the future. In such circumstances, no reasonable individual can raise an objection. On this occasion, it should also be remembered that these men had come to Medina with evil intentions in the first place. Furthermore, they were most probably trained by their tribe to live among the Muslims and injure them. Additionally, it is very plausible that they harboured an evil intention against the Holy Prophetsa himself, but when they could find no opportunity in Medina, they proposed an undertaking outside the city. Their evil intention can also be gauged by the fact that the manner in which they dealt with the Muslim shepherds was not merely one of thieves and bandits, rather, it was an act of utter revenge. If they had initially become Muslims pure-heartedly and later on, after seeing the camels, their intentions had changed for the worse, then in such a case, what should have happened is that they should have taken these camels and ran off. If a shepherd had happened to become a hindrance, then at most, they should have killed him and left. However, the manner in which they killed the Muslim shepherd, and put their own selves in danger by prolonging this act of butchery and torturing the Muslims, evidently shows that this action was not the outcome of coincidental greed. Quite the contrary, it clearly possessed the character of animosity and was the result of heartfelt malice and long-standing rancour. In return for this ruthless action, whatever the Holy Prophetsa did was merely in retribution and equitable retaliation, according to the Mosaic Law, which existed prior to the revelation of Islamic teachings. However, shortly thereafter, Islamic injunctions were revealed and such punishment was declared unlawful, even as an act of retribution. As such, the words of Bukhari are as follows:
اَنَّ النَّبِّیَ صَلَّی اللّٰہُ عَلَیْہِ وَسَلَّمَ بَعْدَ ذٰلِکَ کَانَ یَحُثُّ عَلَی الصَّدَقَۃِ وَیَنْھٰی عَنِ الْمُثْلَۃِ
“‘After this instance, the Holy Prophetsa emphasised magnanimity and generosity, and prohibited mutilating the body of enemies in all circumstances.’
“Various Western research scholars, including Muir, have objected (as per their habit) that the manner in which these murderous pillagers were killed was cruel and barbaric. However, if all the facts are analysed in this case, the mantle of Islam remains absolutely untarnished. Actually, this was not the decision of Islam but of Mosesas, the Law of whom the Christian Messiah did not abrogate but upheld. Perhaps our opponents have the saying of the Christian Messiah in mind:
“‘If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.’
“If so, then verily, our opposition has the right to raise this allegation, but the question is, whether any reasonable individual considers this teaching at all practical. Furthermore, in the last 1,950 years, has any Christian man, woman, Christian community or government acted upon this teaching? Undoubtedly, this teaching is a wonderful one to stand up at the pulpit and exhort in sermons. However, in practical life, this teaching holds no weight whatsoever, nor can a rational individual be prepared to act upon it. Therefore, in such a case, to place these kinds of emotional models before oneself and make the Muslims the target of an allegation is but to furnish proof of one’s own ignorance. Of course, look at the Law of Mosesas, who, unlike Jesusas was a lawmaker and who understood the essence of the law. Alternatively, examine the practical conduct of the Christians and not just their claims. The truth shall become evident that pragmatically, no religion can compare with Islam because it does as it claims. It does not have double standards and its claims and actions are both so elevated, that no reasonable and unprejudiced individual can object to it. Quite the contrary, one is inclined to praise Islam, for like the Mosaic Law, it does not enjoin revenge in all circumstances and to wage the axe of retribution indiscriminately. Neither does it teach that punishment should never be administered, nor that when a criminal commits a crime, he should be supported and strengthened in his purpose (by not punishing him) in accordance with Christian Law. Instead, Islam forsakes these two extremes and presents a moderate teaching that is the basis of true peace in the world, which is:
وَجَزَـٰٓؤُاْ سَيِّئَةٖ سَيِّئَةٞ مِّثۡلُهَا ۖ فَمَنۡ عَفَا وَأَصۡلَحَ فَأَجۡرُهُۥ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ ۚ
“‘The punishment of an injury should be the like thereof and should be of equal intensity. However, if the circumstances are such that a probability of reformation exists by forgiveness or lenience, then forgiveness and lenience are the better course of action. Such an individual shall be deserving of a handsome reward from Allah.’
“This is the teaching that Islam has presented in this regard and no reasonable individual can deny that this is an unrivalled teaching, that has taken into consideration all aspects of human need. Furthermore, even in the case of punishment, it has set the restriction that appropriate bounds should not be exceeded and it has outrightly condemned the barbaric acts of mutilation, etc. In comparison to this, despite the ‘exemplary teaching’ of Jesus Christas, the actual behaviour that Christians have shown towards their enemies and the atrocities which they have committed during wars, are an open page in history, the repetition of which is not required here.” (Sirat Khatam-un-Nabiyyeen, pp. 744-747)
I shall now mention another expedition, which is called the Expedition of Dhi Qard. There are differing opinions among historians and scholars of Hadith in relation to when it took place. Scholars of hadith are of the opinion it took place after the Treaty of Hudaibiyah and before the Battle of Khaybar, between Dhu al-Qa’dah 6 AH and Muharram 7 AH. This is what the scholars of Hadith have settled on, whereas historians believe it happened after the Expedition of Lihyan, i.e., the expedition that took place in Jumada al-Ula 6 AH.
According to Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim, the Expedition of Dhi Qard took place three days before the Battle of Khaybar. Furthermore, they mentioned that it took place after the Treaty of Hudaibiyah and before the Battle of Khaybar. Allamah Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani has written that the narration of Iyas bin Salamah, which Imam Ahmad and Imam Muslim have related, supports the fact that this expedition took place three days before the Battle of Khaybar. In the narration, Hazrat Salamah bin Akwa’ra has mentioned the Treaty of Hudaibiyah first, then the incident of Dhi Qard. In the end, he mentioned that they returned to Medina thereafter, and remained in Medina for three days before departing towards Khaybar.
Conversely, the historians Allamah Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Sa’d have stated that the Expedition of Dhi Qard took place in 6 AH, prior to the Treaty of Hudaibiyah. (Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 106; Sirah Al-Nabwaiyyah, Ibn Kathir, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 365 and 375; Sharah Zurqani al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 109)
Hazrat Mirza Bashir Ahmad Sahibra has not written extensive details about this; however, where he wrote the headings in the latter part of his book, he mentioned that the Expedition of Dhi Qard took place before the Battle of Khaybar, in Muharram 7 AH. (Sirat Khatam-un-Nabiyyeen, p. 837)
The Expedition of Dhi Qard is also known as the Expedition of Ghabah because the she-camels of the Holy Prophetsa would graze there. Ghabah was a field four miles from Medina in the direction of Syria, behind the Uhud Mountain. It is called the Expedition of Dhi Qard because the Holy Prophetsa pursued Uyainah bin Hisn until Dhi Qard, after he had attacked and stolen the Holy Prophet’ssa she-camels. Dhi Qarad is a spring approximately 12 miles from Medina. (Sharah Zurqani al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 109; Furhang-e-Sirat, Zawar Academy, pp. 56 and 217)
The details of this are as follows:
The Holy Prophetsa had 20 she-camels and some other camels which would graze in the fields of Baida, in the direction of Khaybar from Medina, and from Baida to the opposite mountain. A year of drought struck that place, and so they were brought towards Ghabah. A shepherd would go every day after Maghrib to milk them and bring the milk back to the Holy Prophetsa. (Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 95; Sirat Encyclopaedia, Vol. 7, Dar-ul-Islam, Riyadh, p. 463)
Uyainah bin Hisn Fazari, along with 40 riders of the Ghatafan tribe, attacked them and stole the camels.
According to one narration, their leader was Uyainah’s son, Abdur Rahman, whilst Uyainah was present in a location further back to support them. During the attack, the enemies killed the son of Abu Dharr, who was the shepherd of the camels, and they took Abu Dharr’s wife, Laila, as a captive. Even though the wife of Abu Dharr’s son was also there, she managed to save herself from the enemy. (Sharah Zurqani al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 111-112; Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 95)
Who was Uyainah bin Hisn? It is recorded in relation to him that he was the chieftain of the Banu Fazarah tribe on the occasion of the Battle of the Confederates. During the Battle of the Confederates, when three battalions of the enemy joined with the Banu Quraizah with the intention of launching a fierce attack on Medina, Uyainah was the commander of one of those battalions. (Hazrat Syedna Abu Bakr Siddiqra, Muhammad Husain Haikal, Book Corner Showroom, p. 139)
After the Conquest of Mecca, Uyainah bin Hisn accepted Islam.
According to one narration, Uyainah accepted Islam prior to the Conquest of Mecca and even participated in it. He also participated in the Battles of Hunain and Ta’if. The Holy Prophetsa sent him along with 50 riders to punish the Banu Tamim tribe. There were no Muhajir or Ansar Companions with him. The cause for this expedition was that the Banu Tamim tribe prevented the alms collector of the Holy Prophetsa from taking the alms. Then, in the era of Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiqra, Uyainah also fell prey to the sedition of apostasy, and he joined with Tulaihah when he claimed prophethood. At first he became a Muslim, but then became an apostate and pledged allegiance to Tulaihah. He was later taken captive to Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiqra, and he granted him a favour and released him. He therefore re-accepted Islam. (Al-Sirah Al-Halabiyyah, Vol. 2, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 376; Al-Isaba Fi Tamyeez Al-Sahaba, Vol. 4, Dar-ul-Kutub Al-Ilmiyyah, Beirut, p. 639; Zia-un-Nabi, Vol. 4, Zia-ul-Quran Publications Lahore, pp. 566-567)
His standard of faith wavered here and there.
It is mentioned in a narration that the Holy Prophetsa refrained Hazrat Abu Dharr Ghaffarira from going to Ghabah, but despite the warning of the Holy Prophetsa, Hazrat Abu Dharr Ghaffarira went to Ghabah anyway. The details of this are recorded that prior to Uyainah’s attack, Hazrat Abu Dharrra sought permission from the Holy Prophetsa to go to the grazing grounds of his she-camels. The Holy Prophetsa replied, “I fear for you lest the enemy attacks you from that direction, for we are not secure from Uyainah and his allies, and this place is also in that direction.” Hazrat Abu Dharrra insisted, but the Holy Prophetsa said, “I fear that they may kill your son and take your wife as a captive, and you will return with nothing but a staff in your hand.” Hazrat Abu Dharrra states, “How peculiar is my case that the Holy Prophetsa was stating that he feared for me and I was insisting. And by God, it transpired exactly as the Holy Prophetsa had stated. I was home when the she-camels of the Holy Prophetsa had already been brought back to the grazing field. They had been provided to drink (i.e., they were given water and food, etc.), and they had been milked. Then we went to sleep, and during the night, Uyainah attacked us with 40 riders. They stopped and called out. So my son went out, and they killed him.” (Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 95)
In relation to this, there is mention of Salamah bin Akwa’ going out in pursuit of the enemy.
It is mentioned in Sahih al-Bukhari that Salamah bin Akwa’ narrates:
“Once, I departed before the first Adhan of the Fajr Prayer. The she-camels of Allah’s Messengersa used to graze at a place called Dhi Qard. (A servant of the Holy Prophetsa named Rabah was also with Hazrat Salamahra. He continues) A servant of Abdur-Rahman bin Auf met me and said, ‘The she-camels of Allah’s Messengersa had been taken away by force.’ I asked, ‘Who had taken them?’ He replied, ‘The people of Ghatafan.’ (Hazrat Salamahra then said) I made three loud cries [to the people of Medina], saying, ‘O Sabahah!’ (These are words expressed at a time of danger. He continues) I made the people of Medina hear me. (He cried out loud so that they would reach there. His voice was very loud. He then sent Rabah to inform the Holy Prophetsa and then says) Then, I rushed onward and caught up with the thieves while they were watering the camels. I started throwing arrows at them as I was a good archer and I was saying, ‘I am the son of al-Akwa’, and today the wicked people will perish.’ (He went out alone to confront them.) I kept on saying that. When I would be in the trees, I would shoot arrows at them, and when narrow valleys came, I would climb the mountain and throw rocks at them, until I was able to retrieve all of the she-camels from them.”
In Sahih Muslim, the following words are recorded, “I would pursue them in this manner until there was no she-camel of the Holy Prophetsa which I left behind. I also took 30 sheets of cloth from them, which they dropped to lighten their loads whilst fleeing.
I would place a rock upon whatever they discarded so that the Holy Prophetsa and his Companions could identify [the trail]. I continued to pursue them and kept shooting arrows at them. He engaged with them single-handedly.” (Sahih Bukhari, Kitab-ul-Maghazi, Hadith 4194; Sahih Muslim, Kitab-ul-Maghazi, Hadith 3358, Vol. 9, Noor Foundation, pp. 227-228 and 233 [footnote]; Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 96-97; Ghazwat Wa Siraya, Allamah Muhammad Azhar Fareed Shah, Fareediyah Publishers Sahiwal, pp. 305-306)
According to historical accounts and at the commentaries of other narrations of Hadith, it is stated that not all the camels were retrieved; some camels were successfully taken away by the enemy. (Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 107)
On the other hand, when the news of this incident reached the Holy Prophetsa, an announcement was made in Medina, declaring a time of danger. A call was raised:
یَا خَیْلَ اللّٰہِ ارْکَبِیْ
Meaning, “O horsemen of Allah, ride forth”. Immediately, horsemen began gathering around the Holy Prophetsa. Hazrat Miqdadra was the first to arrive, followed by Hazrat ‘Abad bin Bishrra, Sa’d bin Zaid, Usaid bin Hudair, Okashah, Muhriz bin Nazla, Abu Qatadah, and Abu Ayyash.
The Holy Prophetsa appointed Hazrat Sa’d bin Zaidra as the commander and instructed, “Go forth in pursuit of the enemy, I will join you with the others.” The Holy Prophetsa told him to proceed and that he would join him afterwards. The Holy Prophetsa then proceeded with a contingent of five hundred Companions – though some narrations mention the number as seven hundred. He appointed Hazrat Ibn Umm Maktumra as his deputy in Medina and left Hazrat Sa’d bin ‘Ubadahra with three hundred Companions to protect the city. The Holy Prophetsa tied a flag to the spear of Hazrat Miqdad bin Aswadra. (Sharah Zurqani al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 113; Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 96-97)
An incident from this campaign is mentioned as follows: Ibn Ishaq narrates that the Holy Prophetsa said, “O Abu Ayyash, why don’t you give your horse to someone who is a better rider than you so that they may pursue the enemy?” Hazrat Abu Ayyashra replied, “O Messengersa of Allah, I am the best rider.” He says, “After saying this, I spurred my horse forward but it threw me to the ground after just fifty yards. I was astonished that the Holy Prophetsa had been saying that I should give the horse to a more experienced rider, while I said that I was the most experienced rider.” Then the Holy Prophetsa gave his horse to Hazrat Mu‘adh bin Ma‘isra. (Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 97-98)
Hazrat Salamahra, who was in pursuit of the enemy, narrates that as the day progressed, the leader of the enemy, ‘Uyainah, arrived to assist his men. This shows that ‘Uyainah was present there himself and was in a narrow mountain pass. He says, “I climbed a hill, and ‘Uyainah asked his companions, ‘Who is this?’ They replied, ‘This is the one who has been chasing us since morning, shooting arrows at us, and reclaiming the stolen animals. He has taken all of our belongings.’
“‘Uyainah remarked, ‘If he was not certain that others were following him, he would have left you alone by now.’ He was intelligent and told them that another army was on its way. He said to his companions, ‘A few of you should go to him.’ Hence four of them came to me and climbed the hill. I asked them if they knew me, to which they asked, ‘who are you?’ I replied, ‘I am Ibn Akwa‘. By the One who honoured the Holy Prophetsa, none of you can capture me, and if I pursue anyone, they cannot escape me.’
“One of them said, ‘Indeed, I also feel the same way,’ and they retreated out of fear.” This is a narration from Sahih al-Bukhari. (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab-ul-Maghazi, Hadith 4194; Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 96)
Hazrat Salamahra further narrates, “I remained there until I saw the horsemen dispatched by the Holy Prophetsa prior to his own departure, emerging from among the trees. Leading them was Muhriz bin Nazla, followed by Akhram Asadi, then Abu Qatadah Ansari, and finally Miqdad bin Aswad.
“I took hold of the reins on Akhram’s horse, saying, ‘O Akhram, beware of them, lest they kill you (he should not go forth but should wait) until the Holy Prophetsa and his Companions arrive.’ He replied, ‘O Salamah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day, and you know that Paradise is true and Hell is true, then do not come between me and martyrdom.’ He spoke with great courage. Upon this he let him go.
“Akhram and ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Uyainah then came face to face. He injured both ‘Abdur Rahman and his horse but ultimately Abdur Rahman struck him with a spear and martyred him. ‘Abdur Rahman then took Akhram’s horse and fled. Another narration states that Hazrat Akhramra was martyred by Aubar, who was accompanied by his son on the same camel. Hazrat Okashahra killed both of them with a single attack of his spear.
“Yet another account attributes Hazrat Akhram’sra martyrdom to Mas‘adah. There is also mention of a dream about the incident of this martyrdom. A day before fighting against the enemy, Akhram had seen a dream in which the heavens opened for him, and he ascended through the skies until he reached the seventh heaven and then reached the highest stage of connection with God. He was told, ‘This is your destination.’ When he shared this dream with Hazrat Abu Bakrra, he said, ‘May your martyrdom be blessed.’ He was martyred a day later.
“Hazrat Abu Qatadahra arrived shortly after Hazrat Muhrizra. The horseman of the Holy Prophetsa, i.e., Hazrat Abu Qatadahra engaged in combat with ‘Abdur Rahman bin ‘Uyainah. They began jousting, during the fight, ‘Uyainah’s son severed the legs of Abu Qatadah’s horse. Despite this, Hazrat Abu Qatadahra killed him and mounted his enemy’s horse. (Sahih Muslim, Vol. 9, Kitab-ul-Jihad Wa Al-Sayr, Hadith 3358, pp. 233-235; Sharah Zurqani al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, Vol. 3, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, p. 113; Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 98-99)
There is also mention of Hazrat Abu Qatadah’sra battle with Mas’adah Fazari.
According to one narration, when Hazrat Abu Qatadahra learned about the enemy’s attack, the Holy Prophetsa set out from Medina along with his Companions towards Zubab – a small black mountain along the route of Mount Uhud when coming from Thaniyatul Wada. Abu Qatadah went to him and the Holy Prophetsa said, “O Abu Qatadah, go forth, and Allah will help you.”
Hazrat Abu Qatadahra says that he set out accompanied by one other person and they swiftly reached the enemy. Abu Qatadah’s companion said, “What do you think Abu Qatadah? We do not have the strength to fight them.” He said, “Are you saying that I should wait until the Holy Prophetsa?” In other words, he should wait for the reinforcement of the entire army rather than just them two waging an attack. Abu Qatadah says, “I said that I wished for him to attack from one side and I would attack from the other.” Then the two launched an attack and created difficulty for the enemy. The enemy shot arrows at them as a result of which an arrow struck him in the forehead. Hazrat Abu Qatadahra says, “I pulled the arrow out and it felt as if I had taken out a piece of iron. I pressed forward and a swift horseman came before me who was clad in armour. He recognised me but I did not recognise him. He said, ‘O Abu Qatadah, Allah has caused you and I to meet.’ He removed the armour from his face and he turned out to be Mas’adah Fazari. He said, ‘What do you prefer? A sword fight? Jostling? How would you like to fight? Do you want to use swords, spears or do you prefer to wrestle?’ I said it was up to him and that he could choose whatever he liked. He said, ‘Then wrestling it is.’ (These were the unique ways of warfare at the time.) He dismounted his animal as did I. I tied my horse to a tree and also left my weapons there and he followed suit. Then we began fighting, and Allah granted me victory over him. I was on top of him and I intended to get up, take my sword and he too should get his. We were between the two armies and therefore any one of us could have been attacked. Something hit my head and we reached the weapons of Mas’adah whilst fighting. I extended my hand and took hold of his sword. When he saw me holding his sword in hand, he said, ‘O Abu Qatadah, spare me.’ I said, ‘No, now you shall be condemned to hell’ and then killed him. I wrapped him in my sheet and wore his clothes myself and took his weapons. I rode on his horse, because when we were fighting, my horse had run towards the enemy and they hamstrung it. I quickly continued onwards and took hold of Mas’adah’s nephew, who had another 17 horsemen with him. I indicated to them and they waited. Then, when I got close to them, I attacked them and I struck Mas’adah’s nephew with a spear and broke his neck. His comrades fled and I took possession of the camels which the enemy had left at the time of the attack of Hazrat Salama bin Akwa’ra.” (Subul Al-Huda Wa Al-Rishad, Vol. 5, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, pp. 99-100; Furhang-e-Sirat, Zawar Academy, p. 125; Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab-ul-Maghazi, Hadith 4194)
There are remaining details regarding this battle that will, insha-Allah, be mentioned in the future.
(Official Urdu transcript published in the Daily Al Fazl International, 14 February, pp. 2-7. Translated by The Review of Religions.)
