‘GREATER PUNISHMENT’

In ancient Arabia, poetry held a similar position to modern- day journalism. If a matter needs broader attention today, it is disseminated through newspapers and digital media, whereas poetry served this purpose in ancient Arabia.

During the time of the Prophet, notable poets were residing in Makkah, such as Ka’b bin Zuhair, Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra, and Hubayra bin Abi Wahab. They composed poems to insult and denigrate the Prophet. However, when Makkah was conquered in the 8th year after Hijrah, they fled out of fear of retaliation. Hubayra passed away as a non-believer (Ibn Hisham, Al-Sirah, Vol. 2, p. 420), while the other two eventually became ardent supporters of Islam.

Upon their departure from Makkah, the Prophet did not allow his followers to pursue them or offer rewards for their capture. Instead, he prayed for their guidance and created circumstances to awaken their conscience, encourage repentance, and lead them to embrace Islam. Further details regarding this matter can be found in the books of Seerah (Biography of the Prophet).

In summary, both poets, Ka’b bin Zuhair and Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra eventually embraced Islam. Subsequently, they began composing poetry praising the Prophet, shifting their focus from abusive language to supportive expressions.Their acceptance of Islam signified a rejection of their previous actions. Their remarkable talents, previously employed against Islam, were now utilized to advocate for the faith. By reflecting on their life examples, let us contemplate the wisdom behind this transformation.

1. Ka’b bin Zuhair eventually arrived in Madinah due to the insistence of his brother Bujair bin Zuhair. Upon seeing him, one of the Ansar (helpers) confronted Ka’b and requested Prophet Muhammad’s permission to kill “that enemy of God.” However, the Prophet did not allow it and instead prayed for Ka’b. As a result of this kind gesture, Ka’b bin Zuhair embraced Islam. Before he accepted Islam, he was among the leading poets who composed abusive poems against the Prophet. However, after entering the fold of Islam, he became a great admirer of the faith and began writing poetic praises about the Prophet. One notable composition is the encomium (naat) of Baanat Su’ad, which holds a prominent place among poems in praise of the Prophet. Ibn Hisham includes 59 lines of this encomium in his book, wherein Ka’b writes that “the Messenger of God is a luminous star that serves as a source of light” (Ibn Hisham, Al-Sirah, Part 2, pp. 503-513). This example demonstrates how an individual who previously blasphemed the Prophet was transformed by witnessing the non-reactive behaviour of the Prophet and the Muslims, leading him to surrender, believe in the message, and acknowledge the Prophet of Islam as a source of guidance and enlightenment. Undoubtedly, this approach proves to be far more effective than resorting to violence against the blasphemer. It exemplifies recognizing the truth about the Prophet by an erstwhile enemy, showcasing that responding positively with valid counter-arguments to negative words holds greater significance than taking their lives.

2. Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra was a prominent poet of Makkah known for his intelligence and insolence. During the time in Makkah, a verse was revealed in the Quran stating, “You and what you worship instead of God will be fuel for Hell” (21:98). Upon reciting this verse to the people of Makkah, Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra made a statement to Prophet Muhammad, questioning whether those worshipped alongside God would be in Hell along with their followers. He drew a comparison, mentioning that just as we worship angels, Jews worship Ezra (the Prophet), and Christians worship Jesus, the son of Mary.

The statement made by Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra was indeed provocative as it involved mocking and insulting God, the angels, and the Prophets. However, his words did not provoke the Prophet, nor did he instruct his Companions to consider it an unforgivable crime deserving of death. Instead, the Prophet responded positively and seriously, stating that those who desire to be worshipped alongside God would be in the company of those who worship them. (Tafsir al-Tabari, Vol. 16, p. 418)

Although Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra had committed blasphemy, the Prophet’s reasonable response rendered his words meaningless. When Makkah was conquered in the 8th year after Hijrah, Abdullah fled to Najran. His conscience told him that he had committed a crime that could lead to his execution. However, his escape did not bring him peace of mind. Instead, he found himself in a state of uncertainty, doubting his faith.

In the case of Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra as well, the Prophet did not offer a reward for his capture or instruct his Companions to kill him wherever he was found. On the contrary, efforts were made by the Muslims to awaken his dormant conscience. One incident mentioned in the books is when the Muslim poet Hassan bin Thabit Al-Ansari composed poems to stir his conscience. These poems were sent to Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra. One couplet stated, “You should not lose someone like the Messenger; your hatred for him has taken you to a far-off place like Najran, where you are isolated and living a dishonourable life.” This couplet struck Abdullah bin al-Ziba’ra’s conscience like an arrow. Subsequently, he left Najran and returned to Madinah, where he accepted Islam under the guidance of the Prophet. (Ibn S’ad, Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, Vol. 1, p. 391) After embracing Islam, he openly acknowledged his past mistakes through his poetry. Previously, he had mocked the Prophet, but now he composed poems praising the Prophet and his message. Some of his poems are recorded in Ibn Hisham’s book (Al-Sirah, Vol. 2, p. 418).

The conscience lies dormant within every human being. Our primary task is to awaken the conscience, as the early believers did. If killing someone is an act of revenge, then awakening a person’s conscience is an act of goodwill. Undoubtedly, the act of goodwill is far superior to the act of vengeance.

Imposing the death penalty on someone who mocks or denounces the Prophet of Islam is futile. Such an act of killing does not refute the objections raised by the individual. Instead, it creates the perception that since there was no logical or scholarly response to the strong objection, fanatics resorted to the easier option of killing.

Throughout history, many truthful and remarkable individuals have been killed by the tyrants of their time. In this historical context, people tend to associate the victim of violence with righteous individuals who stand for truth. They elevate the victim to the status of a hero, recognizing that the same fate that befell Truth has also befallen the murdered person. Thus, being killed by opponents adds them to the list of “Martyrs of Truth.”

This is not a mere assumption. On the contrary, it is precisely what occurred after the announcement of the death penalty for Salman Rushdie. For instance, a leading article titled “Censored by Religion” was prominently published in the ‘The Times of India’ (March 5, 1989), highlighting the repercussions of such censorship.

In the above article, Salman Rushdie is being compared to historical figures who were either murdered or faced attempts on their lives by their opponents. Examples include Socrates, Galileo, Martin Luther, and even the Prophet of Islam, whom the people of Makkah sought to kill. The article highlights the plight of the famous scientist Galileo in his final days, stating: “Galileo was confined to his villa under strict house arrest for the rest of his life, a fate that could well be Rushdie’s in a different manner today.”